Argo: Volume 20, Number 25 |
Previous | 1 of 16 | Next |
|
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
AFUS To Decide PIRG's Status By R i o h a r d D i s b r ow The long awaited decision on whether the Stockton chapter of N J P I R G will be funded by the Student Activity Fee will take place at the Activity Fee Review Board meeting this Tuesday, May 6. At this time, the AFRB will vote on whether or not to approve the PIRG budget of $25,456; money that will come from within the $1 per credit increase that the board has already proposed. At a recent full board meeting of the A F R B , that had originally been designated to draw up a contract b e t w e e n the two organizations, the proposed PIRG budget and its application came under considerable criticism by the board. The AFRB stated that they would not be able to support the budget for a variety of reasons. These inciude the violation of the board's by-laws; in particular, the use of student money off-cam-pus, the hiring of PIRG Stockton staff people by PIRG's Board of Directors rather than the Office of Campus Activities, academic credit f o r PIRG projects, and that the A F R B would not have approval powers of PIRG Stockton projects. The AFRB also expressed reserva-tions about the lateness of PIRG's request; it had been presented after the resolution for a $1 per credit increase had been adopted and the money already allocated--50 to 60 percent to student health services and the remainder to other clubs in order to offset rising costs due to inflation. The A F R B also stated that they could not allocate funds unless it was on a per program basis, as is done by other organizations. P I R G ' s reaction to these obstacles, as expressed by Paul MacLardy and Olga Arthars, are just as strong. MacLardy expressed regret that the A F R B did not r e c e i v e the necessary information earlier, but stated that the fault was not of the organiza-t i o n ' s . Rather, it was an administra-t i v e delay that impeded the informa-tion packets intended for AFRB members. He stated that the infor-mation packets had to go through the Office of Campus Activities, determined by a directive from President Mitchell, that they were sent out March 14, and that they were held there for nearly a month. When questioned about the pack-ets, Vice President Judy stated that he had not seen the information, nor did he know that it had been sent to his office. A statement regarding the Office of Campus Activities' r e c e i v i n g the packets was made at the last AFRB meeting by Anne Masny, Campus Activities advisor. She stated that the information was r e c e i v e d as per the directive from President Mitchell. MacLardy charged that both the handling of the packets and the directive itself w e r e impediments to the flow of information and were functional in the A F R B ' s late reception of infor-mation and proposals. MacLardy also stated that PIRG costs had to be d i v i d e d evenly by all member schools and that a per program breaking down of the budget was impractical. The money to be budgeted goes to such areas as a staff lawyer, travel expenses, salaries and telephone, to name, a f e w . PIRG could not submit a per program breakdown as there are numerous programs in progress simultaneously. .When questioned on this, Vice President Judy d i f f e r ed from the PFRB, saying that PIRG did not have to submit proposals on a per program basis, but did need to have a breakdown of where the money was going to. When told that PIRG had presented such a docu-ment to AFRB members, Judy e x p r e s s e d surprise and stated that he had not seen one. The last issue of PIRG's conflict with AFRB by-laws is the most c o n f u s i n g . ( MacLardy stated that when President Mitchell told PIRG that they would have to go through A F R B , he expressed a knowledge that the by-laws would not be in agreement with an organization run as PIRG is. The original belief was that the AFRB would act in a regulatory fashion over PIRG and that yearly audits of the organiza-tion and tri-yearly référendums would supply input as to PIRG's e f f i c i e n c y in the opinion of students and the A F R B . But the A F R B says that PIRG's application and prac-tices must follow the by-laws and that, until they do, no money would be granted. When asked if the by-laws could be changed for PIRG, Judy stated that the process would be very difficult and time consum-ing; PI Pi G is proposing such a. change. Even if PIRG's legitimacy to the funding can be established, the next problem would be finding the money. The AFRB has already allocated the $1 per credit increase to health services and other clubs. Another possibility would be to increase the per credit raise to $1.20, but Judy stated that the Stockton Board of Directors would never appwve it; the original increase had been difficult to get. MacLardy has argued that PIRG should be entitled to the 20 cents of the increase on the basis of its overwhelming acceptance by stu-dents in the November referendum. Of the 1,600 students polled, 93 percent approved of the organiza-tion. He also says that the proposed tri-yearly referendum would act as an indicator of how students feel about P I R G ' s programs and accom-plishments. if a decline in popular-ity is evident, the organization would make alterations; if there was a drastic loss of support, PIRG would conduct another referendum to determine the cause. MacLardy emphasized the fact that PIRG would not be forced on the students, but would be here as an option to those who felt it to be a b e n e f i t. Both J udy and A F R B chairperson Maureen Kennelly stated that they are not against PIRG, but that they did have some doubts about its operation, particularly funding. Kennelly expressed . r e s e r v a t i o ns about having to evaluate a large budget on short notice and without seeing any of "the potential pro-grams. She feared having to just " h a n d over $25,000" of the stu-dents' money without some know-l e d g e of benefits that would be derived. MacLardy answered this by saying that examples of programs had been submitted to the A F R B in the information packets. In order to get student input regarding these questions, PIRG is now circulating a survey, available at the tables across from the library, which asked if PIRG should receive its funds f r om the already adopted $1 per credit increase. It also addresses the issue of whether or not the AFRB by-laws should be changed for NJPIRG. A fact sheet will also be distributed on Monday to familiarize students with the issues. The d i f f e r e n c e s continue to arise between the A F R B . N J P I R G ar.d the administration. Hopefully, some of the discrepancies will be answered at the A F R B meeting on Tuesday. Besides a strong showing by PIRG, Jim Judy lias 'also indicated an intention to appear at the meeting and discuss the issues. Civil Disobedience At The Pentagon By Jennifer K i n g of seated people blocking a parking A non-violent civil disobedience injuring some and forcing them was held on Mondav, the twenty- to the sidewalk. eighth protesting nuclear power and One group of C . D . ' e r s set up an weapons, organized by the C o a l i t i o n e n c a m pment on the heliport, which for a Non Nuclear World. The was dismantled several times by " a c t i o n " was designed to draw police and reassembled by campers, attention between the nuclear power They were finally arrested the industry and the weapons industry, f o l l o w i n g morning and charged with as w e l l ' a s to protest escalation of "obstructing a government employ- United States and Russian militar- ce in his official d u t i e s , " as a ism. Beginning at the Department helicopter bearing an admiral had of Energy, the " C . D . " included a been unable to land there. It landed legal slowdown of D.O.E'. employ- instead on a nearby wet lawn, ees. Leaflets and guerilla theatre forcing (as one participant in the, took place before protestors, num- " a c t i o n " gleefully reported) the bering approximately 1,500, admiral to walk through the mud marched across the Potomac River to the Pentagon. Protestors made a symbolic assault upon structure from all f i v e sides, as well as from beneath (via subway). At one entrance, longtime anti-war activist Phil Bennington and other protestors threw a red substance (which later proved not to be blood) on the building, one woman smeared fluid across a flag, while others drew dogans and symbols with it on the pillars. Other demonstrators blocked doorways, escalators, driveways, and the heli-port with their bodies, dispersing only when removed by police. Although approcimately 600 risked arrest, only 350 to 400 were taken into custody. This was apparently due to police reluctance to arrest those sitting in; rather, they cleared entrances and exits by dragging away or flinging the limp resistors f r om passageways. At one point, mounted police, r o d e t h r o u g h a line and get his shoes dirty. The men involved in the group were threaten-ed with thirty days in jail, the women who pleaded guilty were sentenced to ten days. Other demonstrators were charged with criminal tresspass. Those pleading guilty were punished with anything f r om $5 fines to thirty days in jail, with twenty-eight suspended. Those who pleaded not guilty were given trial dates, beginning next week, with bail levied for non-resi-dents. At this writing, an undeter-mined number of persons were still in custody due t> refusal in identify-ing themselves. Free Speech Alley By Dave The Free Speech A l l e y , Stockton's newest mode of communication, attempts to fill a gap in the present communication system. " T h e basic premise of Free Speech Alley is to guarantee every student five min-utes to speak his m i n d , " said Marty Mosen, one of the Alley's three organizers. From 11:30 to 12:30 on Wednes-days in the courtyard between D and F wings, ( f r i s b e e area), Stock-ton students may express them-selves in any manner for five minutes. " T h e purpose of Free Speech A l l e y , " according to Bill Leak, another of its founders, " i s to g i v e students a chance to responded on .a daily basis. A n y reasonalbe Greene f r om of expression may be used: poetry, guitar, e t c ." Shortly before 11:30, a soap box and a person with a clipboard will appear in the courtyard. To talk or whatever for five minutes, show your ID, sign up on the clipboard, step up on the soap box and go for it. " T h e most important point to r e m e m b e r , " commented Mosen, " i s that we have the administra-t i o n ' s permission. W e are doing this under their s a n c t i o n ." The three planners of the Free Speech Alley, Marty Mosen, Bill Leak, and Don Randall, can usually be found in the first booth in the Pub. They ask you to please drop by if you have any further questions.
Object Description
Rating | |
Title | Argo: Volume 20, Number 25 |
Date | 1980-05-02 |
Publisher | Argo Corporation |
Subjects | The Weekly Stockton Community Newspaper |
Publication Title | Argo |
Publication Date Range | 1971 - present |
Description
Title | Argo: Volume 20, Number 25 |
Date | May 2, 1980 |
Publisher | Argo Corporation |
Transcript | AFUS To Decide PIRG's Status By R i o h a r d D i s b r ow The long awaited decision on whether the Stockton chapter of N J P I R G will be funded by the Student Activity Fee will take place at the Activity Fee Review Board meeting this Tuesday, May 6. At this time, the AFRB will vote on whether or not to approve the PIRG budget of $25,456; money that will come from within the $1 per credit increase that the board has already proposed. At a recent full board meeting of the A F R B , that had originally been designated to draw up a contract b e t w e e n the two organizations, the proposed PIRG budget and its application came under considerable criticism by the board. The AFRB stated that they would not be able to support the budget for a variety of reasons. These inciude the violation of the board's by-laws; in particular, the use of student money off-cam-pus, the hiring of PIRG Stockton staff people by PIRG's Board of Directors rather than the Office of Campus Activities, academic credit f o r PIRG projects, and that the A F R B would not have approval powers of PIRG Stockton projects. The AFRB also expressed reserva-tions about the lateness of PIRG's request; it had been presented after the resolution for a $1 per credit increase had been adopted and the money already allocated--50 to 60 percent to student health services and the remainder to other clubs in order to offset rising costs due to inflation. The A F R B also stated that they could not allocate funds unless it was on a per program basis, as is done by other organizations. P I R G ' s reaction to these obstacles, as expressed by Paul MacLardy and Olga Arthars, are just as strong. MacLardy expressed regret that the A F R B did not r e c e i v e the necessary information earlier, but stated that the fault was not of the organiza-t i o n ' s . Rather, it was an administra-t i v e delay that impeded the informa-tion packets intended for AFRB members. He stated that the infor-mation packets had to go through the Office of Campus Activities, determined by a directive from President Mitchell, that they were sent out March 14, and that they were held there for nearly a month. When questioned about the pack-ets, Vice President Judy stated that he had not seen the information, nor did he know that it had been sent to his office. A statement regarding the Office of Campus Activities' r e c e i v i n g the packets was made at the last AFRB meeting by Anne Masny, Campus Activities advisor. She stated that the information was r e c e i v e d as per the directive from President Mitchell. MacLardy charged that both the handling of the packets and the directive itself w e r e impediments to the flow of information and were functional in the A F R B ' s late reception of infor-mation and proposals. MacLardy also stated that PIRG costs had to be d i v i d e d evenly by all member schools and that a per program breaking down of the budget was impractical. The money to be budgeted goes to such areas as a staff lawyer, travel expenses, salaries and telephone, to name, a f e w . PIRG could not submit a per program breakdown as there are numerous programs in progress simultaneously. .When questioned on this, Vice President Judy d i f f e r ed from the PFRB, saying that PIRG did not have to submit proposals on a per program basis, but did need to have a breakdown of where the money was going to. When told that PIRG had presented such a docu-ment to AFRB members, Judy e x p r e s s e d surprise and stated that he had not seen one. The last issue of PIRG's conflict with AFRB by-laws is the most c o n f u s i n g . ( MacLardy stated that when President Mitchell told PIRG that they would have to go through A F R B , he expressed a knowledge that the by-laws would not be in agreement with an organization run as PIRG is. The original belief was that the AFRB would act in a regulatory fashion over PIRG and that yearly audits of the organiza-tion and tri-yearly référendums would supply input as to PIRG's e f f i c i e n c y in the opinion of students and the A F R B . But the A F R B says that PIRG's application and prac-tices must follow the by-laws and that, until they do, no money would be granted. When asked if the by-laws could be changed for PIRG, Judy stated that the process would be very difficult and time consum-ing; PI Pi G is proposing such a. change. Even if PIRG's legitimacy to the funding can be established, the next problem would be finding the money. The AFRB has already allocated the $1 per credit increase to health services and other clubs. Another possibility would be to increase the per credit raise to $1.20, but Judy stated that the Stockton Board of Directors would never appwve it; the original increase had been difficult to get. MacLardy has argued that PIRG should be entitled to the 20 cents of the increase on the basis of its overwhelming acceptance by stu-dents in the November referendum. Of the 1,600 students polled, 93 percent approved of the organiza-tion. He also says that the proposed tri-yearly referendum would act as an indicator of how students feel about P I R G ' s programs and accom-plishments. if a decline in popular-ity is evident, the organization would make alterations; if there was a drastic loss of support, PIRG would conduct another referendum to determine the cause. MacLardy emphasized the fact that PIRG would not be forced on the students, but would be here as an option to those who felt it to be a b e n e f i t. Both J udy and A F R B chairperson Maureen Kennelly stated that they are not against PIRG, but that they did have some doubts about its operation, particularly funding. Kennelly expressed . r e s e r v a t i o ns about having to evaluate a large budget on short notice and without seeing any of "the potential pro-grams. She feared having to just " h a n d over $25,000" of the stu-dents' money without some know-l e d g e of benefits that would be derived. MacLardy answered this by saying that examples of programs had been submitted to the A F R B in the information packets. In order to get student input regarding these questions, PIRG is now circulating a survey, available at the tables across from the library, which asked if PIRG should receive its funds f r om the already adopted $1 per credit increase. It also addresses the issue of whether or not the AFRB by-laws should be changed for NJPIRG. A fact sheet will also be distributed on Monday to familiarize students with the issues. The d i f f e r e n c e s continue to arise between the A F R B . N J P I R G ar.d the administration. Hopefully, some of the discrepancies will be answered at the A F R B meeting on Tuesday. Besides a strong showing by PIRG, Jim Judy lias 'also indicated an intention to appear at the meeting and discuss the issues. Civil Disobedience At The Pentagon By Jennifer K i n g of seated people blocking a parking A non-violent civil disobedience injuring some and forcing them was held on Mondav, the twenty- to the sidewalk. eighth protesting nuclear power and One group of C . D . ' e r s set up an weapons, organized by the C o a l i t i o n e n c a m pment on the heliport, which for a Non Nuclear World. The was dismantled several times by " a c t i o n " was designed to draw police and reassembled by campers, attention between the nuclear power They were finally arrested the industry and the weapons industry, f o l l o w i n g morning and charged with as w e l l ' a s to protest escalation of "obstructing a government employ- United States and Russian militar- ce in his official d u t i e s , " as a ism. Beginning at the Department helicopter bearing an admiral had of Energy, the " C . D . " included a been unable to land there. It landed legal slowdown of D.O.E'. employ- instead on a nearby wet lawn, ees. Leaflets and guerilla theatre forcing (as one participant in the, took place before protestors, num- " a c t i o n " gleefully reported) the bering approximately 1,500, admiral to walk through the mud marched across the Potomac River to the Pentagon. Protestors made a symbolic assault upon structure from all f i v e sides, as well as from beneath (via subway). At one entrance, longtime anti-war activist Phil Bennington and other protestors threw a red substance (which later proved not to be blood) on the building, one woman smeared fluid across a flag, while others drew dogans and symbols with it on the pillars. Other demonstrators blocked doorways, escalators, driveways, and the heli-port with their bodies, dispersing only when removed by police. Although approcimately 600 risked arrest, only 350 to 400 were taken into custody. This was apparently due to police reluctance to arrest those sitting in; rather, they cleared entrances and exits by dragging away or flinging the limp resistors f r om passageways. At one point, mounted police, r o d e t h r o u g h a line and get his shoes dirty. The men involved in the group were threaten-ed with thirty days in jail, the women who pleaded guilty were sentenced to ten days. Other demonstrators were charged with criminal tresspass. Those pleading guilty were punished with anything f r om $5 fines to thirty days in jail, with twenty-eight suspended. Those who pleaded not guilty were given trial dates, beginning next week, with bail levied for non-resi-dents. At this writing, an undeter-mined number of persons were still in custody due t> refusal in identify-ing themselves. Free Speech Alley By Dave The Free Speech A l l e y , Stockton's newest mode of communication, attempts to fill a gap in the present communication system. " T h e basic premise of Free Speech Alley is to guarantee every student five min-utes to speak his m i n d , " said Marty Mosen, one of the Alley's three organizers. From 11:30 to 12:30 on Wednes-days in the courtyard between D and F wings, ( f r i s b e e area), Stock-ton students may express them-selves in any manner for five minutes. " T h e purpose of Free Speech A l l e y , " according to Bill Leak, another of its founders, " i s to g i v e students a chance to responded on .a daily basis. A n y reasonalbe Greene f r om of expression may be used: poetry, guitar, e t c ." Shortly before 11:30, a soap box and a person with a clipboard will appear in the courtyard. To talk or whatever for five minutes, show your ID, sign up on the clipboard, step up on the soap box and go for it. " T h e most important point to r e m e m b e r , " commented Mosen, " i s that we have the administra-t i o n ' s permission. W e are doing this under their s a n c t i o n ." The three planners of the Free Speech Alley, Marty Mosen, Bill Leak, and Don Randall, can usually be found in the first booth in the Pub. They ask you to please drop by if you have any further questions. |
Subjects | The Weekly Stockton Community Newspaper |
Publication Title | Argo |
Publication Date Range | 1971 - present |
Tags
Comments
Post a Comment for Argo: Volume 20, Number 25