The University of California Board of Regents convened on November 13, 2024, to address pressing issues raised by students and faculty regarding the university's investment practices and tuition policies. The meeting featured a public comment period where several speakers voiced strong concerns about the university's financial ties to companies involved in military operations, particularly in relation to the ongoing conflict in Gaza.

One graduate student from UC Berkeley passionately criticized the Board for investing in companies like Lockheed Martin and Elbit Systems, which he claimed are complicit in violence against Palestinians. He argued that these investments contradict the university's mission to promote knowledge and serve the common good. The speaker highlighted the moral implications of using student funds to support entities that contribute to loss of life and destruction in conflict zones, particularly affecting families of students at the university.

Another speaker, Francis, an undergraduate from UCLA, expressed alarm over a proposed increase in nonresident supplemental tuition. He argued that such a move would exacerbate educational inequalities, particularly for low-income and marginalized students. He questioned the university's commitment to affordability and accessibility in light of record profits and administrative raises, while also criticizing policies that limit student protests against these issues.

Fatima, a student from UC Berkeley, reported on resolutions passed by student assemblies advocating for divestment from companies linked to genocide. She noted that a significant number of UC alumni have pledged to withhold donations until the university divests from these entities. Fatima emphasized the overwhelming student support for a ceasefire and urged the Board to heed these calls, drawing parallels to past divestment actions taken by the university.

The public comment period concluded with the Board acknowledging the speakers' concerns, emphasizing that while they do not engage in dialogue during this time, they value the input from the university community. The discussions highlighted a growing tension between student activism and institutional policies, particularly regarding ethical investment and the financial burden on students. The Board's next steps in addressing these issues remain to be seen as they continue to navigate the complexities of governance in a diverse and politically charged environment.