I PINI Page 4 Wednesday, September 10, 1986 The Michigan Daily 4 I r1ir 3Rdpgau Bax1Q Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan Conduct code is unnecessary Vol. XCVII,. No. 5 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Unsigned editorials represent a majority of the Daily's Editorial Board All other cartoons, signed articles, and letters do not necessarily represent the opinion of the Daily. Citizen options The Michigan Supreme Court's decision to uphold the 180 day limit on petition signatures effectively eliminates the ballot proposal as a viable method to change state law. The 180 day limit was originally passed into law in 1972. Shortly afterwards, Attorney General Frank Kelly declared the law uncons- titutional on the grounds that the state constitution specifically allows Michiganders the right to amend the constitution through use of the petition; a right which the legislature's time limit would deny. Kelly correctly noted that it would be impossible to collect the required 304,001 signatures in 180 days. Since Kelly's decision several issues have reached the ballot and have been passed into law even though a majority of their qualifying signatures were collected more than 180 days prior to the filing date. This year, however, a proposal to limit the extent to which public utilities can increase the electric rates, sponsored by the Michigan Citizens Lobby, received 378,981 signatures over about a two and a half year period. The proposal would have prevented Detroit Edison from passing the costs of about 4 billion dollars in cost overruns at its troubled Fermi II nuclear power to its customers; many of whom cannot afford cumalative rate increases which may end up being as high as 40 percent. The ruling which the Supreme Court upheld was originally made by then Ingham County Circuit Judge Robert Bell, who has since been appointed by President Reagan to serve as a District judge. The ruling came at the instigation of the utility companies, Detroit Edison and Consumers Power, and had the unintended result of also removing the death penalty from the ballot. Though Michigan will be better off if it continues its 150 year tradition as the first western government to eliminate the death penalty , it would be preferable to have this position reaffirmed by the voters rather than the courts. The ruling flys in the face of past interpretations of state law which have held that where the current 1960 state constitution was not specific on a point of law one could rely on the 1908 constitution which allowed signatures to be collected in the period between gubernatorial elections. Whereas the appeals court argued that its ruling helped maintain the purity of petitions, it actually purified the ballot of any direct citizen input. The fact that Brighton Millionaire Richard Chrysler was unable to collect the required number of signatures when he was paying people to collect them for a part-time legislature proposal indicates that any grassroots effort working under a six month time limit would be hopeless. Ballot proposals have long been recognized as a valuable tool for citizen action; local groups have sponsored Ann Arbor ballot proposals for a "Central American Peace Initiative" and to force landlords to insulate their buildings. Without the option of the petition, citizen groups cannot combat entrenched interests such as utility companies. State Representative Perry Bullard (D-Ann Arbor) has indicated that he may sponsor legislation to extend the petition deadline. An extension of the time limit to perhaps 18 months or two years deserves the legislature's support. By Jen Faigel, Eric Schnaufer, and Ken Weine For the past four years, the University administration has wanted a student code of nonacademic conduct. A code of nonacademic conduct is a set of prohibitions, punishments and procedures governing student's non- academic lives. Students have vigorously opposed the code because it would violate students' basic civil liberties, interfere in students' private lives and increase administrative control over student life. Due to this oppostion and Regents' bylaw 7.02, the administration has not been able to impose a code. Bylaw 7.02 requires that any code must be approved by the Regents, the facultty's Senate Assembly and the Michigan Student Assembly. MSA's power to veto a code is its only formal power over University affairs and a check on the administration's power over student life. President Shapiro has repeatedly threatened to subvert 7.02's democratic process and implement a code without the approval of the faculty or students. Bylaw 7.02 also establishes the University Council, a committee of administrators, faculty members and students, which is responsible for , among other things, drafting and proposing codes. President Shapiro twice ignored the Council's perogative in 1984 by proposing his own codes. After the University community severely criticized those codes, President Shapiro reconvened the Council he had hoped to eliminate. When the Council met, students argued that the need for a code had to be justified before.a code was written. If there were no justifiable reasons for a code, then the Council should not write one. Instead, they argued, the Council should investigate alternatives to a code such as mediation and aggressive Faigel, Schnaufer. and Weine are members of the summer 1986 University Council use of the existing criminal justice system. Unfortunately, the Council proceeded to write a code without first determining that there was a problem a code could solve. Last April, the Council released for public discussion a section of a code that purportedly dealt exclusively with violent behavior -- " The Emergency Procedures ." Importantly, the student members of the Council did not endorse the Emergency Procedures. After the release of the Emergency Procedures, the faculty and administrators on the Council asked " What next? " For them, the Emergency Procedures were merely one part of a code that would deal with a wide range of behavior, not just violent behavior. In contrast, student members on the Council asked " Why next ? " . The Council had written the Emergency Procedures even though no one had demonstrated a need for them. The Council had proceeded under the assumption that a code was needed to deal with violent behavior. This same mistake should not be repeated. The balance of the Council did not react favorably to the students' questioning of a need for nonacademic regulations governing specific forms of conduct. Everything would go smoother if everyone accepted President Shapiro's position that a code was inevitable and needed. No one should say the king had no clothes. To do so would invite the king to disband the Council. The Chair of the Council recommended a recess until fall. It's time for the Council to return to its work. This work must be free of administrative pressure. The Council should not rush to issue a comprehensive code because the administration is impatient. Rather, the Council should do what is best from the perspective of the entire University community, paying special attention to the fact that nonacademic codes almost exclusively govern students. The University has functioned quite admirably witout an operative code for over a decade. The administration should acknowledge that and await the outcome of the Council's democratic process. This fall, the Council should explore and perhaps propose procedures for dealing with intra-University conflicts that are a true alternative to a code. A true alternative to the code should, include a use of existing mechanisms such as the criminal and civil justice systems. An unsolved arson- is not cause for a code, but diligent police investigation. In conjunction with the criminal and civil systems, University community members could participate in dispute resolution through mediation. University- sponsored mediation could " formalize " informal processes which currently go unnoticed. For example, a dormitory resident is accused by his or her Resident Advisor of vandalizing University property. The University can presently try to evict the student under the terms of a University lease and/ or ask that the student be charged with the malicious destruction of property. In mediation, the University could offer that, if the student compensated the University for the damage he or she might have caused, the University would not press criminal charges or seek to evict the student. If the student found that offer unacceptable, he or she could challenge eviction proceedings and have his or her " day in court ". In this way,, the bargaining positions of the disputants are not illegitimately biased toward the University. The University would also not be able to threaten a student with suspension or expulsion in addition to or instead of eviction or criminal prosecution. Since there is no need for a code, there is no need to write one. However, this does not preclude a serious and fundamental examination of issues. In fact, the University Council process is a democratic means of examining the University's relationship to the community. No one has yet given justifiable response to the question." Why Code ?" . " What next then ? The Council should try to answer rather than beg this question. I I 4 4 Wasserman -Ne LOUSY DMAoc~TS ARE JTIN& LDOOK AT ALL TRIS JVNII- OF SALE1 TREY' E!'XLT ME To RfIAIg BE1 PEE OF PAER Z HAVEN'T LoOKtD AT IIW -m 1.... _ _.f __. l __ , MU.L OF QI&NTS fl. wA 1 _ _ a _ . ti. ,, 3 _.- I LETTERS: Greek experience can be positive 4 t, AAAyo To the Daily: As a sorority, member I feel compelled to respond to the "Why rush?" editorial of September 8. My Greek experience has been almost completely positive. I have diversity among others to satisfy most who desire to' become Greek. People everywhere choose friends that they are comfortable with, that they can share good times with. This is by no means unique to group of friends and choose to about religions other than my broaden this group, rather than own (Jewish) through the to limit it. women in -my house. My As for rewarding understanding of others has "stereotytpical sex role increased, notbroken down. behavior which breaks Though the Greek system is communication and under- not for everyone, it can provide E 1 -7i. 11 a 1 I I I A