100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

March 17, 1972 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1972-03-17

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.


Eighty-one years of editorial freedom
Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan

Views on

the SGC funding proposal

Speaking for the plan .. .

... And the case against

420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Mich.

News Phone: 764-0552

Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.

FRIDAY, MARCH 17, 1972

NIGHT EDITOR: CHRIS PARKS

rrrwr r rirr+ rrr . . ri

Gill for SGC President

T A TIME when students on this cam-
pus have become alienated from Stu-
dent Government Council, Council sore-
ly needs a leader that can infuse that
body with the energy and direction to
take positive steps to satisfy student
needs and concerns.
With this in mind, we endorse Lee Gill
for SGC president. Gill, running on the
Integrity t i c k e t,
stands out as a
h I g h 1 y articulate,E
inspiring candidate,
who has emerged4
from a typically me-:
diocre field of pres-
idential candidates.
Gill is primarily
concerned with
changing the Uni-
versity's unrespon- GILL
sive attitude toward minority students,
establishing more student-run coopera-
tive associations, strengthening student
power on University policy boards and
ending University war research.
BUT IT IS not his platform that makes
him superior. Indeed, many of the
candidates are advocating similar pro-
grams. Gill, however, is the only candi-
date who truly instills confidence that he
will be able to make significant progress
toward his goals.
Perhaps most importantly, Gill has an
understanding of the University and how
to effect change within its structures. As
president of the South Quad Minority
Council, Gill has steered plans for the
Afro-American Cultural Living Units
through the University bureaucracy to its
presentation to the Regents yesterday.
We believe that the persuasive abilities
he has demonstrated on this project will
make him a powerful lobbyist for student
interests.
Gill's running mate for the executive
vice president post, Paula Kendrick, has
been unavailable for an interview with
The Daily.
CONSIDER the other candidates to
be unacceptable for the following
reasons:
Bill Jacobs and Lou Glazer (GROUP).
Jacobs has experience on SGC, but tends
to blame Council's ineffectiveness on
everyone but himself - radicals, con-

servatives, administrators and The Daily.
We feel that his (and GROUP's) lifeless
middle-of-the-road programs have stalled
Council more than any radical-conserva-
tive battles.
Jacobs heads the student meat co-op
and is largely responsible for the appar-
ent failure of that venture, due to his
lack of leadership and foresight.
In addition, neither Jacobs nor Glazer
have demonstrated any underlying politi-
cal philosophy which they would apply
to situations that might occur during the
year. They seem to be running not be-
cause of ideals, but more out of a desire
to head a bureaucracy.
Greg Kateff and Aime Ruessman (Re-
sponsible Alternative Party). Kateff dis-
plays a naive conception of both the pur-
pose and the potential of SGC, saying it
should be "a clearinghouse for student
problems" - similar to 76-GUIDE. Cur-
rently president of South Quad Council,
Kateff says SGC funds should be spent
on more social events-for dormitories and
fraternities.
Chris Rodgers and Jeff Sollinger.
Though they are running on a plat-
form of "representing students who are
not now represented on SGC", Rodgers
and Sollinger seem to have very narrow
concerns and a woeful lack of knowledge
of how to carry through programs. They
want SGC to work for increased student
financial aid, and more help for handi-
capped students, but suggest "writing let-
ters and sending envoys" as the means to
those ends. As candidates, they seek to
"houseclean" SGC and Central Student
Judiciary, which they see as a major step
for student justice - but they have no
knowledge of the Regents' Interim Con-
duct Rules or the new judiciary system.
Scott Seligman and Richard Steinberg
(Student Tenants Union Ticket). These
candidates are primarily concerned with
rather unrealistic plans for student con-
trol of the Ann Arbor housing market,
dormitory cable television systems and
a student moving co-op. The two have
demonstrated neither the knowledge of
the University nor the leadership neces-
sary to serve students properly.
THUS, we urge students to support Lee
Gill and Paula Kendrick for SGC
president and executive vice president.
-THE SENIOR EDITORS

By REBECCA SCHENK
SGC President
OVER THE past years, the University
administration has refused with amaz-
ing regularity to use tuition funds for
important student projects. Because of
this, the execution of these plans, such
as the establishment of a campuswide gro-
cery co-op and a legal advocate for stu-
dents, have fallen to Student Government
Council.
However, SGC does not have the re-
sources of the University as a whole, and
has in the past been unable to fund many
major programs for students.
In the upcoming all-campus election,
students have tle power to give SGC these
resources through a small increase in
SGC's funding.
The per person level of funding will still
remain far lower than the level at other
Universities, but by combining a small
amount of money coming from each stu-
dent into one large sum, important pro-
jects can still be developed.
IN THE LAST all-campus election stu-
dents voted overwhelmingly to support the
establishment of a low cost grocery co-
op, but in the same election rejected an
SGC funding referendum which would have
helped pay for it.
Grocey co-ops do not appear out of thin
air, they have to be set up by a lot
of work and with a substantial sum of
money. The present meat co-operative has
not been able to serve very many stu-
dents only because there was not enough
money available to back a big enough
operation.
with the increase in funding for t h e

ballot question, all of the students can
be served. If the funding referendum fails,
the grocery co-op will not be set up and
students will actually end up spending
much more money than the proposed in-
crease because they will have to buy food
at inflated Ann Arbor prices.
THE STUDENT LEGAL advocate is
another important plan which has the
capability of saving students large sums
of money In the long run. The present
legal aid office can not bring suits against
the University, and neither can the Office
for Student Services lawyer.
For this reason, students lost out on
an opportunity to fight this year's large
tuition and dormitory rate increases
through the courts. The University should
not have been allowed to raise tuition and
dorm rates as much as they did because
of the wage-price freeze.
If there had been a student legal advo-
cate, students might have been saved well
over $100 each by forcing the University
to roll back any increases.
If students support the funding plan
with some of the funds earmarked for the
legal advocate, we wil be able to success-
fully fight future increases.
THE STUDENTS at this University need
and deserve both protection against in-
equities and guarantees of a lower cost of
living. The SGC funding plan goes a long
way towards guaranteeing these Student
needs, and also allows Student Govern-
ment Council to initiate other projects to
further meet these needs.
To become a community we must create
community institutions, to do this stu-
dents must voice yes on the SGC funding
plan.

By ALAN LENHOFF
Editor.
ONCE AGAIN, students are being asked
to approve a proposal on the Student
Government Council ballot that would sub-
stantially increase SGC's funding.
At first glance, the proposal seems rath-
er appealing. Each student would be taxed
$1 per term - primiarily for the purpose
of initiating a cooperative grocery store
and a student legal advocate program. In
addition, SGC's general fund would be al-
most doubled.
But rather than voting to enhance SGC's
financial position, students would be well-
advised to take a scrutinizing look at their
student government and its financial poli-
cies.
OF GREATEST CONCERN has been
SGC's demonstrated propensity for misal-
location of funds. In fact, last year, SGC's
two largest (and most highly self-lauded)
allocationswent to programs that benefit-
ed few students.
First, Council rather haphazardly dashed
off a check for $1,500 to a Washtenaw
County Print Co-operative - only to find
that the money was not being used to buy
printing equipment as it had requested.
It was only after a series of hearings on
thermatter that a red-faced SGC managed
to recover its allocation.
Council's only other major expenditure
last year was a $1,500 investment in a
meat co-op. And despite claims of suc-
cess from Bill Jacobs, SGC's "vice presi-
dent for the grocery co-operative," the co-
op's services - both in terms of pricing
and customer convenience - have not
been adequate enough to attract more
than 80 customers a week.

Essentially, the only stable business op-
erations that SGC offers for students are
its insurance and charter flight opera-
tions. But these operations are designed
to generate operatinig funds for SGC rath-
er than provide students with the beat
possible services for their money.
IT' IS IN THIS context that Council
asks students to entrust it with a great
deal of new operating funds. But there is
little reason to believe that SGC's finan-
cial responsibility will markedly improve
this term.
The plan for the student grocery co-
operative seems doomed before it starts.
A student cooperative store can hardly
compete with major supermarket chains
that own massive stores, fleets of trucks
and purchase goods in boxcar quantities.
It is likely that A & P can sell products
cheaper than SGC can purchase them.
An added dilemma is posed by the po-
litical make-up .of Council. Once domin-
ated by leftist radicals, SGC now is hand-
cuffed by the ultra-conservative Respon-
sible Alternative Party and the lackluster,
moderate GROUP members.
Radical Council member Joel Silverstein
was only half-kidding when he said that
some Council members'would like to.pro-
vide funding fbr ROTC's Pershing Rifle
drill team. Certainly, granting a great
amount of new funds to a Council of this
mold would be a mistake.
THUS, UNTIL COUNCIL becomes re-
sponsive and responsible to students, it
should be maintained at its current fund-
ing level. Granting a large funding in-
crease to SGC would be a vote of confi-
dence that is ihardly deserved.

p

grocery co-op earmarked in this
Regents
By CARLA RAPOPORT
Executive Editor
LONG THE most conservative
membei' of the board, perhaps
Regent Robert Brown (R-Kala-
mazoo) was the most flip about
the black students' proposal for
an Afro-American housing unit.
"If you're going to do it for
the blacks, why not for the
milquetoasts? What if 25 per cent
of the white students on campus
are milquetoasts? What if they
demand separate housing? It's the
milquetoasts I'm worried about,"
said Brown after the meeting.
As the Regents' open hearing on
the proposed unit progressed, the
liberals on the board began to
look more and more concerned.
"I had no idea there were ra-
cial tensions here. I thought we
were doing so well. I'm just very
depressed." said Gertrude Hueb-
ner to a reporter.
IT WAS a depressing meeting.
With some 30 students jammed
into the Regents' Room to hear
the discussion on the proposed
housing unit, it was depressing to
see how little our Regents under-
stand the racial problems which
rack the dormitories.
And it was depressing to see
how the Regents were uninformed,
noncommittal, and in some cases
sharply opposed to the black stu-
dents' proposal.
While Regent James Waters (D-

year's

meeting: A

depressing debacle

Muskegon) says he now supports
the plan, as late as Wednesday the
liberal black lawyer said he hadn't
"studied" the problem yet and
hadn't been in touch with the
plan's organizers.
Regent Robert Nederlander (D-
Southfield) said yesterday, "I
really don't know. There are so
many arguments on both sides.
I wish I had some sort of answer,
but I don't."
Luckily for the Regents. how-
ever, the Michigan Civil Rights
Commission (MCRC) decided to
thoroughly investigate the pro-
posed housing plan and presented
their findings at yesterday's
meeting.
IF ANYTHING saves this is-
sue from the usual route of post-
ponement at today's public Re-
gents meeting, the MCRC report
will. The Regents have had their
homework done for them and done
amazingly well.
Among the conclusions of this
report on the Afro-American liv-
ing unit in South Quad - which
would be open to anyone with a
"sincere" interest in black af-
fairs - is the following passage.
"In the past, University policy
has tried to be color-blind. Many
people in the University, both
black and white, have expressed
the hope that if everyone could
just treat each other as fellow hu-

man beings, everything would be
all right."
But, the passage continues, "bet-
ter race relations" can only begin
with being color-conscious as
we've beenhall our lives, and deal-
ing with the "fears and stereo-
types that all races have of each
other."
"If the living unit turns out to
be segregated, the white students
of the University will have only
themselves to blame," it concludes.
Until the release of this report,
yesterday's meeting was a sorry
affair. As the presentations ram-
bled on, the situation became
muddier and muddler. Those stu-
dents opposed to the living unit
said they doubted the honesty of
those supporting it. Those speak-
ing for it were often too emotion-
al to deal effectively with the Re-
gents' questions.
Luckily, a prestigious state com-
mission has neatly sewed up the
case for the Regents and the Uni-
versity community -- according
to MCRC, the housing plan is not
in violation of state law, it is in
fact, a desirable method toward
racial harmony.
Without MCRC's report, the Re-
gents would not be ready to make

4

4

A powerless SGC flounders

a decision on the housing unit is-'
sue this morning. Yesterday's
hearing only touched on the
myriad of feelings among those
who support the plan, as well as
those against.
AS LONG as the Regents came

to town on Thursday to make a
decision on Friday, they should
heed the conclusions of MCRC's
carefully investigated report. Then,
maybe they should look around
for an agency to do their research
every month.

ABOUT SEVEN years ago, several stu-
dents running for Student Govern-
ment Council banded together under the
acronym GROUP, advocating lower tui-
tion, various kinds of student co-ops, im-
proved counseling, better housing and
academic reform.
Several of them were elected and, from
all indications, they tried to work hard
for these goals.
Though none of those old candidates
have any ties with the current slate of
SGC candidates running under that name
nor any other current student party, it is
significant that so many goals of 1965
SGC candidates must still appear on stu-
dent party platforms today because they
were never achieved.
Judging from the current campaign
literature, candidates feel students want
these and other programs which have
been kicked around for a long time. Judg-
ing from SGC's limited progress in
achieving them, the chances for such
change are slim.
It is apparent to those students inter-
ested (and evident from the number of
students who aren't) that SGC has failed.
It has little credibility before faculty and
administration. Undergraduates now on
campus have seen only one oritwo visible,
productive resultsof SGC Initiatives. The
average student doesn't know what SGC
is or who is on it - despite the semi-
annual littering of the campus area by
SGC hopefuls. If students want what the
candidates say they do, they have wanted
it for a long time and SGC just hasn't de-
livered.
Because of this, students are justified
in looking critically at exactly what can
be reasonably expected from SGC in the
future and whether it's worth having, re-
gardless of who takes over the leadership
roles in next week's election.

arrangements, SGC, along with the fac-
ulty, has no legislative recourse if some-
thing it doesn't like is passed or if some-
thing it likes is quashed by the Regents.
Thus, SGC intrinsically exercises only
two real functions: selecting students for
advisory boards and the semi-autonomous
Office of Student; Services Policy Board
and allocating its own funds.
With so little real power, much of
Council's activity has centered around
individual members' lobbying efforts.
These low profile activities haven't been
of interest to students until crisis situa-
tions arose or some SGC wrongdoing
came to light. Arid because there was
little relating to the entire student body
going on, SGC assumed the character of
those who derive satisfaction from oc-
cupying important positions in a basically
impotent organization.
SEVERAL NOW argue that if students
vote to give more money to SGC it
will increase student involvement in the
organization and increase the sphere of
services it is able to provide. This is un-
likely because Council has not used its
existing funds productively, often giving
money away on a first come-first served
basis.
Another point of view is that if force-
ful and intelligent students are elected,
they will organize to more effectively
lobby for student interests. But this idea
also is weak because it places students in
the position which existing OSS officials,
advocates, and student workers should be
assuming.
IF STUDENTS really want to move to-
ward the changes that most of the can-
didates talk about, they must secure a
participatory, not advisory, voice in Uni-
versity decision-making.
The Regents must be required to dele-
gate some of the power they exercise in
th mam o a e at .a M ha.Cflif .. f

Letters to The, Da~ly'

irschman endorsed
forpublications b.
THE SENIOR EDITORS
THE TEN-PERSON Board for Student Publications has jurisdiction
over the financial affairs of various student publications including
The Daily. It has no power over editorial content of The Daily, that
is delegated to the paper's Senior Editors.
Of the four candidates running for the one open student seat
(there are three on the board), we endorse incumbent Jay Hirschman,
and find the others unacceptable.
In his two years service on the board, Hirschman has proved him-
self an effectiye liaison between staff members of student publications
and the professional and faculty members of the board.
Realizing that disadvantaged students often cannot afford to work
on The Daily but most hold part-time jobs, Hirschman is trying to
establish a Daily scholarship. He also advocates a campus magazine
"representative of present student interests."
Hirschman has an understanding of the board's functions and re-
sponsibilities that the other candidates sorely lack, and he has done
an excellent job this year of representing student interests on the
board.
Ron Landsman is a former Managing Editor of The Daily,
whose campaign literature calls for The Daily to cover student govern-
ment, campus activities and student organization. He of all people
should know, however, that the board exercises no control over edi-
torial policy. In addition, Landsman is a graduate student-and ac-
cording to the rules therefore ineligible for the vacant undergraduate
seat.
IT IS DOUBTFUL whether Brad Taylor is even serious in his
bid for the board. Taylor has admitted he knows "nothing" of the
board's function and is just running "to smash The Daily." He says
in his platform "I do not seek editorial control over The Daily," but,
also wants to "clean The Daily out by ediminating 'editorial com-
r,-. -4.. 4 - - - .. 4 . .. y

Meaty complaint
To The Daily:
THE DAILY (March 15) pub-
lished an editorial concerning the
SOC Meat Co-op that made a
number of false charges.
The editorial says: "A meat co-
op has been started. And finish-
ed." FACT-The SGC Meat Co-op
has been started and is continu-
ing its operation.
The editorial says: "There are
food co-ops in town, with which
Council could have collaborated."
FACT - The other members of
the SGC Grocery Co-op Committee
and I have had extensive discus-
sions with other food co-ops.
For the time being, these co-
ops have preferred to retain their
individuality - an attitude which
we support. However, if our fund-
ing qustion passes, we will be in-
vesting in facilities that will be
availablenfor common use by all
Ann Arbor food co-ops.
The editorial states that t h e
SGC Meat Co-op is an "order tak-
ing store with sales persons and
customers. A genuine co-op has
no sales persons or customers; but
rather members."
FACT - The SGC Meat Co-op
does operate on an order basis, as
do many other co-ops. This is the
least expensive method of opera-
tion as there are no overhead
costs or wastage costs. The SGC
Meat Co-op does not have sales
personnel - we have members
that staff (without pay) the table
in the fishbowl and distribute the
meat in the SAB.
The editorial states that "lack
of student interest . . . along with

of its limited preliminary and
information gathering goals, the
Meat Co-op has been a veritable
success.
Finally, it should be noted that
Rose Sue Berstein. (the author of
the editorial) made no effort to
consult me, or any of the other
workers of the cooperative. Hence,
the false reporting.
I would hope that The Daily will
publish a retraction and then as-
sign members of their staff to in-
vestigate and report on the oper-
ation of the SOC Meat Co-op -
something I have been consistent-
ly requesting The Daily to do since
the inception of the Co-op.
-Bill Jacobs
SGC Vice President for
the Grocery Cooperative
March 15
SGC and committees
To The Daily:
THE RECENT article in T h e
Daily (March 15) criticizing SGC
appointments to token commit-
tees in the University did not
bring out all of the , important
points about these appointments,
appointments which never should
have been made by a student gov-
ernment that is really interested
in fighting for student interests.
These committees are all pop-
ulated by large numbers of fa-
culty and administrators, with
only a few students so that it
looks like the students have a
real say. In actuality, the s t u-
dents are being given only token
input, rather than real power.
It is especialy distressing to

to these committees so that the
University will no longer be able
to put foreward the false facade
of listening to students when they
really ignore them.
All University offices should be
set up in a similar manner to
the Office for Student Services
Policy, where students hale a
majority voice. Also, the selection
of University Vice Presidents
should be based upon panels sub-
mitted by committees with a stu-
dent voice, rather than by com-
mittees which really act as arms
of the administration.
Until this kind of' network is
set up, SGC should refuse to ac-
cede to tokenism which has -been
put forward by members of SGC
who should have known better.
The students will be much better
off in the end.
--Jay Hack
Administrative Vice
President
Student Government
Council
March 16
School board
To The Daily:
THE STORY of the Ann Arbor
School Board meeting of Feb. 9
(Daily, Feb. 11) contained a mis-
interpretation of the statement
made by the League of Women
Voters of Ann Arbor. At the meet-
ing, the League, along with the
AAUW Education Committee and
Ann Arbor CARE, spoke in opposi-
tion to the Renken proposal which
was substituted by the Board for
the Johnson Resnlition nE anal

*

Back to Top

© 2020 Regents of the University of Michigan