94 aitian a tn Eighty-Four Years of Editorial Freedom Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan lettersle tters lettersle tters le ttersleti 420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Mi. 48104 News Phone: 764-0552 SATURDAY, MARCH 30, 1974 Hungry have rights too WEN MOST OF US think of minimum daily requirements, we think of the side panels of our Wheaties and Trix boxes listing how much B vitamin, ribo- flavin and iron our body needs. But for thousands in the world, mini- mum daily requirement is met by a cup of some form of starch spooned into their stomachs, a cup of rice once a day or enough water to keep their mouths from gumming shut. The pictures of thin, bloated-belly, shoeless children stare accusingly out of magazine pages, usually urging our con- sciences to "adopt" these children long- aistance. But after reading the ad and closing the magazine, their faces, their empty stomachs and matching lives are easy to forget. Most Americans have no idea what hunger is. As close as most of us come to it is the growling produced by a de- layed lunch or a skipped breakfast. A STAGGERING TWO AND A half bil- lion people in the world lack enough food to keep them healthy, let alone sat- isfied. Satisfaction to the point of com- fort or indigestion is an unheard-of lux- ury to two-thirds of the worlds stomachs. The politics of world hunger are more than gastronomically distressing. Those in the world with the most money, com- forts, conveniences and advantages not surprisingly have the best-stocked pan- tries and best-lined bellies. Disproportionate a m o u n t s of the world's food ends up on U. S. Highways being trucked to the nation's Krogers and A&P's. Distribution of the world's food is not based on the empty levels in a iation's stomachs, but the fill level in the nation's wallets. One third of the world uses two thirds of the world's food - and we belong to that one third. In no other country is over supply of food the problem it is here. Vic Tanny, Diet Pepsi, Dr. Stillman and Playtex girdles have made their for- tunes from overfed, stuffed people stretching their seams. HAVE LITTLE MEANS for compre- hending the severity of the world food crisis. It does no good to push the last piece of meat loaf on the plate of a recalcitrant child with the warning that there are starving children in India. And it does less good to package last week's leftovers in Tupperware and send them air mail to Djakarta. The hungry and starving have a right to be fed if the food exists. And since hunger is ultimately a question of sur- vival when it is not appeased, the hun- gry may not wait for the food to be shipped in CARE packages. The revolt may have already begun with the kid- naping of the children of the token wealthy. We may yet see a massive revo- lution by the desperately hungry, angry that their children die while we stuff Hostess twinkies down our flabby throats. The Green Revolution does not deal with corn and rice, but with currency in thousand dollar denominations. And the term Green Revolution may prophesy the coming onslaught of the bony enraged masses demanding ample blood be paid for the years they have, spent breadless. -BETH NISSEN Tenure reform needed AT THE RISK OF losing flexibility, it is time for the Literary College (LSA) to level with its departments and facul- ty. For although Dean Rhodes and others claim that economic factors are not af- fecting individual tenure decisions, it is clear that the economic environment in which those decisions are being made is affecting the entire tenure-granting process. As the University enters its no-growth state and as the LSA College approaches an all-tenured faculty, it is true that granting tenure to a new candidate is a very serious matter. A candidate can now lose out if it is thought that the college can in the future attract an even higher quality candidate. Editorial Staff DANIEL SDDLE Editor in Chief JUDY RUSKIN and REBECCA WARNER Managing Editors TONY SCHWARTZ .................... Sunday Editor MARTIN PORTER .................... Sunday Editor SUE STEPHENSON..................Feature Editor MARNIE HEYN .................... Editorial Director CINDY HILL ...................... Executive Editor KENNETH FINK...... ... .Arts Editor STAFF WRITERS: Prakash Aswani, Gordon Atcheson, Laura Berman, Dan Biugerman, Howard Brick, Bonnie Carnes, Charles Coleman Barb Cornell, Jeff Day, Della DiPietro, Mike Duweck, Ted Evan- off, Matt Gerson, William Heenan, Steve Hersh, Jack Krost, Andrea Lilly, Mary Long, Jean Love, Jeff Luxenberg, Josephine Marc otty, Beth Nissen, Cheryl Pilate; Ann Rauma, Sara Rimer, Jim Schuster, Bob Seidenstein, Stephen Selbst, Chip Sinclair, Jeff Sorensen, David Stoll, Paul Ter- williger. DAILY WEATHER BUREAU: William Marino and Den- nis Dismachek (forecasters) Business Staff MARK SANCRAINTE Business Manager LINDA ROSS .................... Operations Manager AMY KANENGISER ............... Display Manager SUE DeSMET ..............Finance Manager DEPT. MORS.: LaurIe Gross, Ellen Jones, Cassie St. Clair ASSOC. MGRS.: Rob Cerra, Niles Fleischer, Lisa Kanengiser, Kathy Keller, Debby Novess ASST. MGRS.: Karen Copeland, Barb Kowalski, Liz Kurnetz, Nancy Ross, Dave Schwartz STAFF: Beth Phillips, Rosanne Lapinski SALESPEOPLE: Mike Bingen, Susan Goldstick, Emily Hirf, Bill Koopman, Eric Phillips, Andi Yakushav Photography Staff THOMAS GOTTLIEB Chief Photographer Obviously the college can and should be more choosy in awarding tenure as the pool of capable teachers expands. What is wrong is that LSA is still trying to per- petrate the myth that the system is not competitive even though market condi- tions indicate the opposite. JUST NOW A COLLEGE Priorities Com- mittee is starting to rationally plan, with the aid of the departments, the rumber of professorships they will al- locate among the departments of the fu- ture. This is necessary because of the ro-growth state of the college and be- cause of enrollment shifts among the de- partments. In the face of this, however, LSA pre- fers to maintain the tenure system which is leading to the all-tenured college. The results could be bitter department- al infighting to control the possible all- tenured departments of the future, as has been the case of the English depart- ment, general discontent with LSA on the part of still more departments, and the oxploitation of assistant professors who have served the University without being fairly appraised of their chance for at- taining tenure. As the college drifts to an all-tenured faculty we must ask where the impetus to modify the current system lies. UNFORTUNATELY, THE political power rests with the already tenured pro- fessors. Certainly they would have a stake in maintaining the status quo. At the point of an all-tenured faculty the main sufferers will not be assistant professors because they hardly will be any. The University's reputation will suffer, but the real losers will be the students of the future. The tenure system must be modified iow before it is too late. Various options are open. One could be refusing all future tenure past a certain point and instead only hiring faculty members under short of long-term contracts, depending on needs foreseen by planners. Meanwhile, LSA must admit that all qualified assistant professors will not necessarily be hired because of new high- er standards reflecting the job market, before more assistant professors have to face this cruel fact with little but a sense of frustration and the knowledge that they have been deceived. AT LEAST IT IS A hopeful sign that rational planning for the college and its departments has begun. -BOB SEIDENSTEIN Richman To The Daily: IN AN ARTICLE in The Daily, Democratic Council candidate Mary Richman is quoted as admit- ting that she used to eat non-Unit- ed Farmworkers lettuce, but that she has "not done so in the last five months."'She also claimed to be sorry to have eaten the non- union lettuce. I live in the Law Quad, and eat there, as does Mary Ricman. The Law Quad is the only dorm which refuses to boycott non-UFW head lettuce, and as a result, people who eat at the Law Quad have the op- portunity to scab on the UFW at every meal. As Mary's statement in the Daily admits, she was one of the people who took advantage of this opportunity (every day). However, Mary's statement is unfortunately incomplete, and per- haps misleading. Firstly, she does not say that the Law Quad fre- quently provided an alternative to the scab lettuce - that is, a greens salad consisting of es- carole, bib lettuce, and other non- head lettuce greens. She passed up this opportunity to symbolically boycott the scab lettuce served at the Law Quad, and instead consist- ently ate he stab lettuce. SECONDLY, MARY'S asrdon that she has not eaten scab let- tuce for the past five months is in- correct. While eating in the same dining room as she does, I have ob- served her eat scab lettuce several times during the current semester. The most recent incident was late in February. The bins containg the scab lettuce and the inoffen- sive greens salad are separate and clearly marked, so I am sur of the accuracy of my observations. I might also add that although Mary claims to support the letuce boycott and the UFW, I have nev- er heard or seen her attempt to convince anyone to boycott the scab lettuce served at the L aw Quad. In sum, it would seem that Mary Richman has a very unusual con- ception of what it means to sup- port the lettuce boyott and 'he UFW. -Alan Kaufman Law, '74 March 27, 1974 To The Daily: I HAVE BEEN following t h e Second Ward City Council Cam- paign with great intere t for the past month and have attended a number of candidate debates be- tween Kathy Kozachenk of the H.R.P. and the Democrats' Mary Richman. What strikes me most about these debates is the totally flippant and unconcerned attitude of Richm an. Where Kozachenko seems to have done some preparation on the is- sues, Mary Richman always seems unprepared. She always starts out saying "I'm supposed to say some- thing but I don't have anything ready." Kathy Kozachenko, at least, shows some real concern for t h e people she is speaking to and the ward she hopes to represent. She seems to know what she is talking about and has some good ideas about what City Council should do. Mary Richman, on th o t h e r hand, appears to be more concern- ed about getting the detate over with so that she can "go out drink- ing with a really nice guy I met canvassing." I can just se her in the middle of some really import- ant City Council meeting saying (as I've heard her say at a num- ber of discussions) "Let get this over with before the bars close." -Ginny duRivage Second Ward Voer Dope To The Daily: THE QUESTION of the $5 dope lbw raises some interesting ques- tions which have not been fully examined. Most of the Democrats and all of the Human Rights Party candidates have come out in fav- of the amendment in an attempt to bring out the student vote. And why is it that the students seem to be backing this ordinance so heavily? Is it because they like to toke up? Is it because they want an end to prosecution with respect to the so-called victimless crimes. Yes, these are the reasons that these fuzzy thinkers give for their stand on this dubious proposal. The supporters of this amendment will be here, a good number of them, for four years. If they get their $5 dope law then they can get high in peace with no fear of harassment, and then they leave after awhile, leav- ing what will surely become a ruin- ed city. Have any of them stopped to think about the seriousness of their proposal? What is it going to do to Ann Arbor? I'll tell you what it's go- ing to do, it's going to turn it into a major center for drug traffic in the midwest. The coming of a lot of drug dealers and users can only serve to increase the crime rate and nothing else. The deal- ers and users will come here for the obvious reason that they wi1l have almost no fear of b a i a g who have a stake in what goes on in this community for many many years to come, unlike most of these 'Johnny-come-lately' one-worldeis who now infest our city. Don't get me wrong. Pim not knocking dope. The idea of legaliz- ing dope on a national or state- wide level is a good idea and I'm all in favor of it. But those who think that the best place to start is right here in Ann Arbor show a remarkable amount of naivete. It can only bring a strong influx of those only seek- ing to 'get a buzz' without getting busted. Is this a positive step for our city? Will it mean a better environment for all living in this city, or will it only serve the pur- poses of those who use marijuana? I would say that this proposal is the "zenith of mongoloid reason- ing., ANOTHER QUESTION that must be raised by the coming elelon is, do we want more gay people representing us on city council? I would have no objections to gay people at all if they would be peaceful and not flaunt their sex- uality like a new car, but no, they insist on making a show and car- rying on in public and at council meetings like so many children who have been cheated out of trick or treats. Do these people take a mature approach to their problems? Are they dignified and resigne when they fail in their ridiculous cam- paigh to turn the Rubayat into a 'gay restaurant'? No, they raise hell and act ridiculous like they thought savoir faire was a French poet. Did we see the Renublicans throw a tantrum when the d o p e law was first enstated several years back when they did not have a council majority? I ask you, did anybody get assaulted with a cher- ry pie then? Later, when the shoe was on the other foot, all that the Republicans got was a lot of sit, like they were attempting Lo put ten five-year-old little boys to bed at the same time. LIKE MY analogies? I'm sure you won't like my letter, and I doubt you'll want to print it, see- ing how it doesn't exactly coin- cide with your editorial fe ings, but I do think that some of these questions should be evaluated by the people, and I hope they'll make a sane choice on April 1. -Richard Kharl Rent control To The Daily: LET'S SET the record straight on rent control. This HRP-support- ed measure, which supposedly helps "the people," really favors large landlords and discriminaes against small landlords. The pe- ple who would be most hurt by the passage of rent control would be small landlords who have work- ed for years to pay off their mort- gages and who work on nights and weekends doing their own mainten- ance. Here's how rent control would actually work. A big landlord can hire other people to do his main- tenance work. He is allowed to collect 150 per cent of this from his tenants. A small landlord does his own maintenance. He can collect nothing for this. A big land- lord uses leverage so that he pays a minimum down payment on his property and a bank finances the rest. He can collect 100 per cent of his huge principal and interest pay- ments from his tenants. A small landlord may owe very little on his property or may own it free and clear. If he does not owe any principal and interest pay- ments to the bank, then he can't collect anything from his tenants on his property investment. His only profit on a building w o r t h $25,000 or $30,000 will be 50 per- cent of his maintenance costs, per- haps only $50 to $100 if his build- ing is in good shape and he does all his own work. HRP TALKS about 14 per cent profit - HAH! His profit is less than 1 per cent. So what can he do? Sell out, obviously. But the proposed rent control law doesn't even let him do that. Anyone who buys property is not allowed to re- cover principal and interest pay- ments than those paid by the sell- er in August 1972 to July 19/3 un les he gets permission from the rent control board. People are going to chink tw;ce about buying rented property if they have to go through a big rent control bureaucracy to get their mortgage rates approved, so pro- perty prices will go down and the small landlord will lose more mon- ey when he tries to sell. The HRP will get him both ways - - he won't be able to make a profit if he keeps his property and he'll lose money if he sells The big landlords, witn h i g ni leverages, and the slum landlords, with high maintenance costs, will still make their profits under rent control. It's the small landlords who take pride in their property who will bethurt. I say vote. NO on rent control. -Sandra J. Rice mining profits. The HRP does not have this data either, but rent control proponents describe pro- fits in emotional terms ranging from "excessive" to "immoral" to "enormous." An anonymous writer in t he Michigan Daily last week claim- ed a banker told him annual pro- fits should be 10 per cent to 14 percent of the total purchase price of the property. I quoted this to a management firm, a banker, a lawyer, and an accountant. They all told me I had misread t h e article; the figures actually re- ferred to the down payment, not the purchase price. I told them the article emphasized the figures re- ferred to the purchase price. They all told me such a return was im- possible and that no banker would make such an absurd statement. One said if any banker made such a claim, "he must be senile." The figures they gave me on after tax- es profits ranged from 8 to 15 per cent of the landlord's down payment. Proponents of rent control claim the proposal allows the landlord a 14 per cent return on his in- vestment. This is simply not true. The actual formula for calculat- ing profits, which ties profits to the amount of maintenance per- formed, makes it impossible to ever achieve a 14 per cent return. Studies done over many years over the whole United States show that maintenance costs on a typi- cal house average 2 to 3 per cent per year of the purchase price of the house. Maintenance on a mo- dern apartment complex built largely of concrete and brick would be relatively less than for a house. Also, the purchase price per rental unit would be lower for a com- plex than for a house. A little fig- uring will show that if annual maintenance costs are 2 to 3 per cent of the purchase price and al- lowed profit is equal to SO per cent ofthe maintenance costs; then in order to make a 14 per cent return on the down payment, the down payment can only be 7 to 10 per cent of the purchase price. Lending institutions current- ly require a 30 per cent dow n payment, meaning profits would be less than 5 per cent - less than a savings account earns. In addition,mortgage interest rates are currently 9 per cent or more. The proposal only allows 8 per cent to be considered as part of the costs. The additional 1 per cent interest payments must come from the al- ready greatly reduced "profits". Actual profits may be restrict- ed in another way. Claims that the proposal allows a 14 per cent return on the downpayment are an incorrect simplification of what the proposal actually says: The maxi- mum profit allowed is 14 per cent or twice the assessed valuation minus all encumbrances. T h i s means if the purchase price is greater than twice the assessed valuation (and a bank may ap- praise property at a greater value than the city), the maximum pro- fit allowed will be less than 14 per cent of the down payment. Since the city only assesses pro- perty every three to four years, and inflation is (well) over 5 per cent per year, the assessed valua- tion could be 40 per cent or less of the purchase price. As an exam- ple (probably an extreme exam- ple), the assessed valuation of the house I am living in is equal to onlys35 per cent of the purchase price. The down payment woull thus have to exceed 30 per cent of the purchase price of this house to allow any profit at all. HRP literaturetsays the average landlord keeps ten cents on the dollar (10kper cent) of gross rent receipts. The Tenants Union says rent cotnrol should lower rents 15 per cent. Even those who think "profit" is a dirty word should realize that while the government may be able to afford to subsidize housing, the individual investors in Ann Arbor cannot. By preventing reasonable profits, rent control will cause disinvestment in rental hoti G-e ing in Ann Arbor, discourage new construction, and cause conversion of existing rental units to other uses such as single family dwel- ings, condominiums, and offices. -Richard Wolfe March 25 To The Daily: THE GHOST of Watergate has come to haunt Ann Arbor in this year's contest between proponents of rent control and local housing moguls. The revelations which have occurred over the past week concerning the largeamounts of money being spent by landlords trying to defeat rent control - as well as the questionable sources of much of the funds - should ser- iously call into question the sin- cerity of "Citizens for G o o d Housing" and their expressed con- cern for the welfare of tenants and home owners of Ann Arbor. For example, if rent control is so obviously bad for both tenants and home owners, why do the manage- ment companies and realtors in- volved in the anti-rent control cam- paign feel that it is necessary to spend an incredible $43,000 f o r their campaign against Proposal A? ments ($1,500), Standard R e a 1 t y Corp. ($1,800), and the Ann Ar- bor Board of Realtors ($1,000)? I THINK THAT the reasons are pretty clear - and should be clear to all the voters of the city. The people who stand to lose when rent control goes into effect are the real estate speculators, who have been cleaning up on the housing short- age which Ann Arbor suffers, and the big management companies, which will have their sky-high pro- fits returned to a more reasonable level by the rent control plan. Some home owners will probably be convinced by the righ priced advertising campaign being funded by these special interest groups, but it is my hope that the majority of both tenants and home owners will be able to see beyond the self- serving arguments of the housing industry and will perceive that rent control is necessary in Ann Arbor, that it will help make reasonably priced housing available to those who need it, and will improve the quality of life in our city. Look at the facts, ignore the scare tactics, and vote YES on rent control April 1st! -David Goodman March 27 endorsement To The Daily: THE DAILY'S endorsement of most of the HRP candidates comes as no surprise to long-time readers. The Daily has endorsed every HRP candidate who's had any chance of winning, and quite a few who could only throw races to the Republicans, including the one who put the much-hated C. Wil- iam Colburn in his present seat two years ago. But even so, this year's endorse- ments are surprisingly inaccurate, inconsistent and propagandistic. HRP's Beth Brunton is given cre- dit for opposing the MacDonald's and the Packard-Platt shopping center while on the Planning Com- mission. She has never served on the Planning Commission. On the basis of a single disputed quote in The Ann Arbor News, which Daily staffers constantly criticize as biased, inept, e t c. when it disagrees with Daily phil- osophy, The Daily brands McGee as inconsistent on rent control. This, despite the appearance on The Daily's own edit nage of a let- ter from HRP activist David Ca- hill (Daily 3/37), who oes nc even support McGee. Cahill as- serted unequivocally his belief that McGee has been clearly and con- sistently in support of the Rent Control Amendment. THE DAILY criticizes Democrat Mary Richman for taking nearly the identical stand on the ballot proposals that it praises Democrat Jamie Kenworthy for taking. ,goth have supported both proosals and both have done so with reserva- tions about the practicality and le- gal problems of the amendments, as reported in The Daily's own ar- ticles. Events have shown the Demo- crats' reservations justified. In the first legal opinion rendered, At- torney General Kelley questons the legality of city-imposed con- trol in general and several speci- fics in the proposal. He questioned the constitutionality of the s am e clause cited by the Democrats, that which makes it a crime for city officials to enforce state law. The Second Ward endorsement is little more than a smear. Mary Richman, it is suggested, h as giv- en only lip service to reforms. Lip service? Perhaps The Daily for- gets Mary's participation in the LSA Bookstore sit-in in :969, an ef- fort which produced the Union Ce- lar and which The Daily has al- ways enthusiastically supported. Mary put herself on the line, was arrested and convicted, but was cleared on appeal. MARY HAS BEEN active in tie peace movement as early as 1964. She campaigned for McCarthy and McGovern, worked in the Environ- 'mental Law Society and worked with the Ann Arbor Committee to Impeach Nixon. There is nothing "sketchy about Mary's political history. According to The Daily, K"za- chenko offers concrete proposals while Richman offers empty rhe- toric, particularly in the are, of city finances. Richman has re- peatedly stated her support .cr graduated income taxes, but points out they are barred by the State Constitution. She proposes the only feasible alternative: the 1 per cent flat rate city in-omeax, which would net the city over $1 million a year in additional re- venue and replace part if the re- gressive property tax. Kozachen ko's answer solution to the city's $1.2 million deficit is to cut the police chief's $27,000 salary, IT'S POLITICALLY easy to promise people what they want: lower rents and more social serv- ices, etc. It's politically hard, but much more honest, to tell people that, legally and practically. they Corruption To The Daily: THE DAILY expose of Democrat Coleen McGee was a fine piece of muckraking by reporter J a c k Krost. It is encouraging to see t h a t The Daily is willing to uncover po- litical flip-flopping even when it discredits so-called liberals like Ms. McGee. The lesson of Watergate has all too often been misunderstood by many people. It is notjust t h a t Richard Nixon and his cronies are corrupt politicians. Rather, it seems that both Democrats and Republicans have shared in t h e same general approach to politics which puts special interests be- fore those of the people in general, and which tries to avoid taking hard stands on controversial issues which pit the average person against big business. For example, it was revealed re- cently that Democratic Congres- sional candidates received even more money from the milk indus- try than did Nixon. And last week, Common Cause, usually a k n e e - jerk liberal support group, blast- ed the Democrats in Congress for dragging their feet on election re- form. DOES ANYONE think that the likes of "Scoop" Jackson, Hubert Humphrey, Ted Kennedy, Richard Daley, or John Stennis are any more honest than Nixon? Some people may cling to the hope that the local Democratic Party is better than the national party. Coleen McGee's multiple stands on rent control however, should show them otherwise. Also, not only does the locallDemocratic Party refuse to address the is- sue of rent control and the $ fine, but its candidates (not just Mc- Gee) change their position depend- ing on the audience. I hope t h a t Ann Arbor voters will show Mon- day that they reject these tac- tics. -A First Ward resident March 26 Colburn To The Daily: I PROTEST your biased and il- logical "news" story entitled "Col- burn changes stance" (3-21-74). Your reporter, Mr. Whiting, i- logically contends that GOP cao- didate Colburn has contradicted himself because he had said, on the one hand, "I feel Individual rights should be protected," and on the other, "Council must con- trol individual property owners' rights." The statemens would be in contradiction only i property owners were not individuals - but that just isn't so! Moreover, even if you contend that Colburn meant that the rights of both owners and renters should be protected, where's the contra- diction? Both groups do have rights, and rights should always be protected. And note that Cl- burn said Council should "con- trol," i.e. limit, i.e. dfine and regulate (not ignore or violate) owners' rights. -Robert Edgeworth Rackham GEO To The Daily: A FEW comments are in order about. the mildly hostile and de- finitely off-base letter to the edi- tor from Mr. Eric Hansen and others in the Department of Micro- biology. The most recent date to which the public emergence of GEO (then OTF) can reasonably be ascribed is November 8, 1973, nearly s months ago. On this date the mass meeting (with attend-' ance estimated at 450) mandated the organization to investigate, and if indicated, pursue the route of unionization of graduate assist- ants. Between that time anad the mass meeting and strike vote held on February 18 of this year, an 'intensive organizing effort was conducted, accompanied by a great deal of leaflet publicity and Daily reporting, as well as coverage in the University Record and t h e Ann Arbor News. GEO's regnest early in 1974 for a comprehensive list of graduate assistants w a s denied by the administration, GEO wanted the list expressly for the purpose of insuring participation in the organization by assistants in all University programs. It was clearly in the interest of the Uni- versity to, keep GEO ignorant of the existence and location of as- sistants in the less accessible de- partments, especially those tucked away in the medical center and the north campus. THE OMISSION of any depart- ment in the organizing thrust is certainly seriously lamentable but in view of the enormity of the task of organizing 2185 as3 stants and working and studying at the same time, it is unfair to hold culpable those who devoted so much time and energy to the ef- fort, especially when a single tele- phone call by one of the ignored parties would suffice to establish contact with GEO. At a time when the unity of graduate assistants is so crucially at stake, it is re- KEN FINK .. .. . . .......... . STUART HOLLANDER ........, KAREN KASMAUSKI........ DAVID MARGOLICK ...... ALLISON RUTTAN........ JOHN UPTON .....,.,....... . Staff Photographer Staff Photographer Staff Photographer Staff Photographer Staff Photographer Staff Photographer 4 I