THE MICHIGAN DAIL)
Tuesday, August 27, 1968
J .
Jorm
By LUCY KENNEDY
t student-led move to end
itory regulations, although
ed by- confusion on all sides,
I the University's loco par-
stand without obvious show
rce by students or adminis-/
yrs.
tching the administration
nt some cases the students by
ise, Joint Judiciary Council
) paved the way for elimina-
of dormitory regulations in
pring of 1967 by announcing
ould not discipline students
breaking rules students did
nake.
e tenuous position in which
decision put the University
nistration eliminated many
e grounds for the open stu-
display of force seen in the
of 1966. Tensions, however,
there.
idents remembered the "Uni-
y administration's 11 g h1
ed implementation in the
of 1966 of a sit-in ban and
rules
an admiinstrative refusal to con-
sider a student referendum asking
discontinuation of class ranking
for the draft. During the battl
to end dormitory regulations ther
were several occasions when the
memory of fall, 1966 could have
become a violent reality.
Revolutionary but quiet, JJC',
new stand on discipline studentC
came when Student Governmen
Council (8GC) appointed nine
new members to JJC pledged t
uphold only student made regula-
tions. The new members gave JJC
previously more oriented to ex-
plaining rules and acting as an
appeal body, a new policy-making
function.
JJC's jurisdiction, which would
later confuse student and admin-
istrative groups, did not become
a problem in the first SGC-
administration encounter.
Immediately after the election
of Bruce Kahn, '68, to SOC pres-
idency, SGC recommended elim
ination of sophomore women',
Loco
- hours, and also resolved that reg-
g ulations for both curfew and
g hours when members of the opp-
e site sex could visit would be de-
e termined by the individual hous-
e ing units.
e JJC STAND
According to JJC's stand soph-
s omore women staying out after
s the midnight curfew could be
t breaking a rule but would not
e be punished. They could stay out
o beyond the curfew for sophomore
-' women set up in the University
Regulations code. JJC, however,
- would not punish sophomore wo-
n men for staying out after cur-
g few because the student made.
rule (passed by SGC) did not set
a curfew.
Although immediately after
e SGC's elimination of sophomore
women's hours, chances for ad-
ministrative approval seemed dim,
no plans were made to use JJC's
n new stand on discipline. This was
- to come later.
Vice President ,for Student Af-
s fairs Richard Cutler reversed
early disapproval of SGC's move
and recommended sophomore wo-
men's hours for a trial period of
one year to the Regents. The is-
sue of visitation hours was
dropped.
SGC INDOCTRINATION
Later, the administration was
to become more rigid, recognizing
thesubtle yet sweeping changes
SGC and JJC were making, in
the power structure
Over the summer, in orientation
talks to freshmen, the neatness of
a student take-over of University
regulations thoughdJJC was
talked up. SGC was developing a
surer and surer strategy for elim-
ination of non-student made
rules.
In the fall of 1967 the new
Residential College gave the cam-
pus a lesson in the simplicity of
-student power in setting up its
government Residential College
faculty, students, and adminis-
trators banded to form a com-
munity government with autdn-
omy from the rest of the Univer-
sity and no- formal structure.
piestions
Despite possible administra-
tion and landlord apoplexy over
premarital cohabitation and ac-
companying activities, the fran-
tic brouhaha raised over the
issue seems unnecessary
While many students do suc-
cessfully cohabitate, frequently
tudents are beset by every day
complications which make the
supposedly convenient rooming
arrangement more trouble than
it is worth.
One junior says he and his
companion are c o n s t a n t l y
frought with financial prob-
lems. "It's a real bind deciding
how the rent's going to be split
and who buys groceries each
week," he says.
; A harried senior elaborated
on another more common situ-
ation - "When your room-
mate's woman no longer knocks
at 'the bathroom door, there's
bound to be difficulty."
Probably the biggest dilemma
is how to handle the folks back
home. One coed relates her
weekly panic to beat her par-
ents' telephone call at her
''supposed residence."
Mailing addresses pose yet ,
another complication. "I can't
tell my dad to ,write care of my
boyfriend's ap,rtment, can I?"
asks a junior woman. "Instead,
every day I've got to run over
to my old place and pick up
the bills,"
Unquestionably though, co-
habitation exists in Ann Arbor.
Apparently it can survive com-
plaints from fellow tenants,
landlords, the pressures of stu-
dent life-and dormitory rules.
Given biology and contem-
porary American society, the
old University regulations seem
a weak weapon in the fight for
chastity.
parentis
di
RC was the first campus unit
to vote for abolition of freshman
women's hours. Director of Uni-
versity Housing John Feldkamp
and Cutler were more open to the
experimental college's proposal
than they would later prove to be
to other housing units. However,
they never gave the RC move ap-
proval and did not send the mat-
ter to the Regents.
RC's move canhonly be appre-
ciated in the light of the trend
it set for other units. Once RC's
community government approved
elimination of freshmen women's
hours in the College, RC freshmen,
considered the issue closed. As
far as they were concerned, no
punishment (handled in final ap-
peal by JJC) would be levied for
staying out after University cur-
few, so freshmen women's hours
no longer existed for RC women.
All campus living units were
given the ,opportunity to follow
RC's example after SGC com-
pletely revised the University Reg-
ulations code in mid-September to.
fulfill the promise of JJC's move
of the previous spring.
The SGC written regulations
code provided for a decision on
women's hours through an all
campus referendum, an all women
referendum, an all freshmen wo"-
men referendum, or/a decision at
the housing unit or Inter House
Assembly (IHA) level.
In the new regulation code men
living in University housing were:
to be responsible for their own
internal regulations - this would
include visitation hours-through
house councils "or any other snit
deemed appropriate by he stu-
dents."
NEW REGULATIONS
Rules-for all women in Univer-
sity living units were to be deter-
mined through house councils "or,
other appropriate units" with the
exception of women's hours.
Following city and state regu-
lations, less stringent than the
University's the new SGC regula-
tions allowed students. over 21 in
University housing to possess in-
toxicants even with minors pres-
ent.
The University's blanket ban en
"any disruptive sit-in" that gad
touched off the student power
movement of .fall, 1966, was re-
placed by a new SGC regulation
prohibiting "individual or mass
acts that destroy University prop-
erty or are against city, state or
federal law."
STUDENT DOUBTS
After this September meeting
SGC found itself dispelling doubt
and confusion-some created by
the administration-and some from
students questioning what body
should make the new student
rules-for the next semester and
a half.
Among students the main prob-
lem was that student rule-making
depended on student initative.
South Quad Council took advant-
age of abolition of old University
regulations less than a week after
the SGC meeting by dropping all
dress regulations. They had the
approval of the South Quad di-
rector but said they would have
gone ahead even if they hadn't
had it.
Other house councils, however,{
were slower to make their own
rules.
Which students would initiate
the new rules caused problems be-
tween IHA and house councils.
Until Blagdon House, Markley, in
the beginning of October, dis-
carded all punishments for stay-
ing out after curfew, many IHA
members f e t standardhrules!
should be made for all housing
units.
JURISDICTION CLARIFIED
After Blagdon's action SGC re-:
versed its earlier call for some
type of referendum and recog-
nized the right of individual hous-
ing units to make their own hours!
as well as other regulations.
Many units, with the exception
of some conservative groups -
notably sorority houses-then fol-
lowed Blagdon's example ; with
little hesitation.
Students were not being pun-
ished for breaking curfew unless
it was a' curfew set by students.
ADMINISTRATIVE QUESTIONS
Administration attempts to
halt the spread of SG-C's move in-
creased. All of the administration
moves were surrounded by deeper
and deeper- examination of the
Regents Bylaws to see if SGC
could :
1) seize control of disciplining
procedure.
2) seize control of rules-making
itself
3) separate rule-making from'
discipline.
On point one SGC and most of
the students had no question. JJC
was the final body of appeal and
if they chose riot to punish stu-
dents for breaking the old, large-
ly administration -written, rules
those rules were defunct.
HOW TO PUNISH? .
Feldkamp, however, considered
the old University regulations in
effect.
Feldkamp and other adminis-i
trators argued that JJC had the
right to discipline only from.tthe
Regents, so could have this power
removed. No administrator, how-
ever, was willing to court the stu-
dent movement that would have
been inevitable if JJC's. right to
discipline were usurped.
Without JJC it was impossible
for residence hall staffs to
punish rule-breakers except by
going to their schools or colleges
and asking that they be given:
academic punishment.
with
right to give individual house
councils power over rule-making
Only the Board had that right ,
they argued.
By the next month the rule-
making, disciplining situation was
chaotic.
In mid-October, Alice Lloyd
House judiciary was telling fresh-
man women that only the Uni-
versity could regulate hours while
Blagdon House in Markley was
drawing up parental permission
slips for Blagdon freshmen who
had already abolished curfew.
But student determination was
high and a hasty administrative
re-structuring or blanket punish-
ment would have touched off
student action.
Without recourse to drastic
measures, the Office- of Univer
sity Housing was in an unques-
tionably delicate position. The
only way, with existing University
structures, Feldkamp could see
that a student get non-academic
punishment was to bring the case
before JJC. JJC would have
thrown the case out as a non-
student made rule.
Meanwhile, another branch of
administration residence hall gov-
ernment, the Board, dropped its
earlier disapproval of SGC's move
and asked Cutler to recommend to the r
the Regents an end to freshman bodies
women's hours. "Th
BOARD REVERSAL "belie
The issue of visitation, recentlyUni
son
brought up by Frost House, Mark- spln
ley, in a house council move that duct.'
extended visiting hours from SUC
noon to midnight, was not dis-
cussed . Hov
In mid-November a report of argue
Faculty Assembly's Student Rela- presen
tions Committee (SRC) generally autho
lent support to the student argu- condi
ments but pointed out the need eercn
or Regental or administrative duct
clarification to once again bringd
difficulty
"
oed protests impersonality of U at teach-in
SGC President Bruce Kahn supports new rules
. ..andamid
By NADINE COHODAS
Aftee spending the eighth
consecutive Saturday n i g h tr
strewn over the sofa in your,
apartment because your room-
mate is otherwise occupied, you'
fondly remember the old days
in University housing when the
reliable RA. would case the
halls- each weekend evening
around 1 a.m. and deliver the
familiar "Time's up." T h is
catchy little warning invariab-
ly meant you- could return to.
your regulation puce-colored
dorm room and finally settle in
for a good night's sleep.
Unfortunately with the new,
more liberal dormitory p'olicies,
this isn't always true. Despite
the administration's unflinch-
ing attitude, ("Cohabitation
and overnight visitation will
subject student's to University
discipline."), couches, general-
ly lacking in the dorms, are still
needed for those of us with
frisky roommates. -
With the new dormitory pol-
icies, individual houses are able
to set up their own visitation
rules and women have no hours
if granted parental permission.
The administration, however, is
quick to clarify its stand. Hous-
ing director John Feldkamp re-,
affirms the administration po-
sition:. "The University finds
unacceptable premarital- sexual
intercourse."
The University has held firm
to this no-sex-in-the-newly-
liberated-dorm policy. In an
April incident, for example,
Thomas Fox, director of South
Quad, took action against a
Quad coed who had a boy in
her room after hours.
Fox sent a letter to the girl's
parents informing them of her
misdemeanor. Feldkamp says
these letters are always "fac-
tual and objective."
However, the U n i v e rs i t y
seems to be something less
than 100 per cent successful in
regulating morals in the dorm.
Their record for successful lgco
parentis becomes evei lower
for students in off-campus
housing.
Since a majority of Univer-
sity students live in apart-
ments, anyway, the University's
adamant stand appears rather
ridiculous.
Even if Ann Arbor landlords
take their tenants' morals to
heart as the administration.
professes, their control over the
renting students' personal be-
havior is minimal.
Some landlords, however,
seek to insure moral upright-
ness in their establishments.
Consequently, they include in
each lease a passage which pro-
hibits cohabitation. -
The landlords admit it is dif-
ficult to substantiate the
charge of cohabitation, but in
one case a student was actually
evicted after he was found to
be living with his girlfriend.
In most cases, however, land
lords say the cohabitation issue
is so delicate an affair that it
is seldom the reaon for -evic-
tion. If tenants are suspected
of cohabitation, landlords tend
to seek other reasons for evic-
tion - making too much noise
or having a pet. -
While some landlords may
worry a great deal about
breeding sin and vice in their
buildings, other realtors take a
laissez-faire attitude toward the.
whole situatkon. One lanfdlord
bluntly said it was "none of his
business" who his tenants slept
with. All he asked was that
they "exercise good, taste."
a star
and n
discip
unrel
"It
the le
tablis
for m
demic
a pro
handl
t\ th
functi
SRC
the H
a solu
CUTL
As
(Boar
rule-r
level
over
Regen
But
of the
elimin
and t
power
ule-making and disciplining
s together.
he SRC," the report said,
eves that students at the,
ersity have the primary re-
ibility to develop sets of
affecting their personal con-
RE-ENFORCEMENT
wever, the report further
d that, "The sitautifn at
nt is one in which the legal
ority over non-academic mis-
uct resides in one place, while
mechanisms with which to
ise, authority over. miscon-
resides in another. In such
te, of affairs it is difficult
may be legally impossible to
line students for misconduct
ated to academic behavior.
is advisable . . . to identify
egal problems involved to es-
h a clear University policy
niscondtct unrelated to aca-
c behavior ,and to establish
'per judiciary procedure for
ling cases that are relevant
e University's educational
Lion."
C looked to the report of
iatcher Commission for such
ution.
LER, REGENTS STALL
faculty and administrative
rd of Governors) approval of
making at the house council
increased, student tension
stalling by Cutler and the
nts mounted.
t Cutler agreed at the end
e fall semester to recommend
nation of women's hours
the Board granted students
r to determine visitation
hours through their house coun-
cils. This was largely a result of
several mass co-ed visits in Fred-
erick House, South Quad.
Kahn, although pleased, with
the Board's approval reminded
students that this was an ex-post
facto approval and that students
made, the rules,
In the beginning of the winter
semester, 1968, deliberate stalling
on implementation of the Board's
new policies made Kahn's re-
marks a valid warning.
REGENTAL REVIEW
, he' Board's decision was by
bylaw and tradition a final deci-
sion.
However, on the-request of Uni-
versity President Robben Fleming,
the Regents decided to review the
Board's decision.
Students retalitated to what
t h e y c al le d "administrative
games" with three mass violations
of curfew at Markley, Bursley, and
South Quad.
The day after the, third teach-
in Prof. Frank Braun, chairman
of the Board of Governors, "ad-
dressed the Regents as a member
of their own generation explain-
ing that although hard to accept,
it was necessary to initiate rea-
sonable changes."
The . issue of loco parentis,
mortally wounded two semesters
earlier, formally died the next
day when the Regents approved
elimination of curfew require-
ments to all students with par-
ental permission. They also al-
lowed each University housing
unit to determine by a democratic
process its own visiting hours.
i
At least in the literary college,
faculty members showed them-
selves quite'hesitant 'to give out
academic punishments for break-
ing non-academic conduct rules.
The faculty student Board of
Governors of Residence Balls
claimed SGC did not have the
The
Richard Cutler
00o
0
,
01
us,
;I
..0,
0
N
I
The back-to-school rush always includes a
' John Feldkamp
- I
GOT YOURSELF
A PROBLEM?
Mistake?
Wet Books?
Try ERASABLE paper
Try our BOOKBAGS
rush for telephone service. Every year at this
time we gear up by putting on extra people
and working extra hours. But there have always
been many who- had to wait for their tele-
phones longer than we'd likes
If you want telephone service this fall, the
sooner you can place your order with us the
sooner we'll lie able to install it.
You can order telephone service any day,
Monday through Friday, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
As soon as you know your new address, call
(Area 313) 761-9900 or visit our office in the
City Center Building, 220 E. Huron. Or, if
ypu're out of town, just call us collect.
For those of you who can't order until the
last minute, we'll be open an extra day, Satur-
day, August 24 from 8-5.
I
. . 4 Colors
Type Faint-? Try a NEW RIBBON
Birthday ? Try a MUG . . . Several Types
No Room? Try a BOOKSTAND or RACK
Tough Course ? Try an OUTLINE for Help
Forget ?
Try an ADDRESS BOOK
I