E OPINION The Michigan Daily Monday, April 3, 1989 Pae4 Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan 420 Maynard St. Vol. IC, No. 125 Ann Arbor MI 48109 Unsigned editorials represent a majority of the Daily's Editorial Board. All ott ar cartoons, signed articles, and letters do not necessarily represent the opinion of the Daily. To vote or not to vote? All registered voters are eligable to vote in today's city elections. However, when the influences of powerful elitist institutions and stuctural-inequities in the United States are considered, the effectiveness of representing the concerns of people through bi-partisan politics is questionable. Yet, exercising the right to vote can serve as a small step towards political empowerment. k4 I, Vote agains T:ERE ARE several good reasons why University students should vote against Ann Arbor mayoral incumbent Gerald Jermigan. Jernigan has not supported low income housing. He seem much more concerned with the building of parking structures than he is with legislation which would require developers to allot a certain per- centage of new construction to low income housing. He has opposed a citizens' review board for the police, which would help facilitate more accurate investigations of criminal, and often racist, acts committed by the Ann Arbor police. Currently, when eyewitnesses to police brutality come st wrd: vo ANN MARIE Coleman is running unop- posed in the first ward. She receives our enthusiastic support and endorsement. Her commitment to people, and especially to women and people of color, is outstand- ing. With councilmember Larry Hunter, Coleman implemented a program of sensitivity training for the police depart- -t Jernigan forth to complain, they are entitled to nothing better than an internal police investigation. Jemaigan has been the most adamant, on city council in insisting that the police can do no wrong, and refuses to take the issue of police brutality seriously. Ray Clevenger, Jernigan's Democratic opponent, has unfortunately opposed the Headlee Amendment waiver, which would allow minor property taxes to increase in order to help resolve the problem of the city budget deficit. He has also made some unfortunate remarks opposing halfway houses, which attempt to ease the re- integration of prisoners into the community, in general. Nonetheless it is well past time for the end of the current administration. - te COlemanl ment. Because of her concern for maintaining low income housing in Ann Arbor, Coleman has proposed a housing commission for low income citizens in which members would own all or part of the building they lived in. Coleman's commitment to people also makes it clear that she will protect the so- cial services sector of the city budget as the city continues to face a budget crisis. CkUALTvC5 UJWNQi5 WOUL A ID OV T &0 JA AEP E ' T, I~LL f5EF ?T TOE TE HAD VVQN. tTS5 UCAR does not support amended class provosal Changes violate proposal's intent 2nd ward: vote Levine IN THE Second Ward, both incumbent Republican Terry Martin and Democratic chollenger Jesse Levine have made opposition to increasing property taxes a centerpiece of their campaigns. But that is one of the few similarities of th ,two. Martin is likely the most conser- vaoive member of city council. Levine, a LS&kA senior, is more liberal. For example, Martin stands against even considering mandatory recycling, though there is a consensus in the city that such a I hrd w ar: In the Third Ward, Nelson Meade is the better candidate as between him and Donna Richter. Meade was president of the Washtenaw County Parks and Recreation Commission for 14 years, and added five major new parks during his tenure. To his credit, he has supported the Headlee amendment waiver (unfortunately his fel- low Democrats Kolb, Spayth, and Cle- venger do not) which would allow the city' to raise property taxes by more than the rate of inflation. Although other measures that have been proposed to close the deficit, such as a proposed parking ticket amnesty and sale of some city real estate, would provide some short term revenue, Meade is correct when he says that an in- crease in property taxes beyond inflation will be necessary to close the gap. He supports mandatory recycling and is willing to consider legislation requiring developers to set aside a percentage of new housing for low income units. However, 4th ward In the Fourth Ward, Democrat Christo- pher Kolb is the clear choice over incum- bent Jerry Schleicher. Kolb, a graduate of the University's School of Natural Re- sources, is well-prepared to address the city's landfill crisis. He also supports a civilian review board for the police and opposes the deputization of campus secu- rity officers. Unlike his opponent, Kolb has sup- 5th ward: Vera Spayth, the Democratic contender for the fifth ward, is the candidate most likely to support a progressive agenda. Snavth has cearly shown her commitment program is needed to lessen the burden on the city's overflowing landfill. Her only alternatives are a inevitably 'ineffective voluntary recycling program and a high- tech incinerator, which could only work in the too-distant future. Levine on the other hand, understands the need for a mandatory recycling pro- gram, for environmental reasons, and be- cause the program could bring a grant from the state which would be helpful in solving the city's budget crisis. vote Meade he does not support a citizen review board for the police, and this is disturbing. Perhaps the major difference between Meade and his Republican opponent is that he would vote more often with the Democratic caucus, and if nothing else, this would probably mean fewer cuts in human services as the city tries to narrow its budget deficit of $1.6 million. However, if we are to be realistic as to what a Democratic city council would of- fer Ann Arbor, it is unfortunate that the Democratic party does not offer a clear al- ternative to the Republicans' support for whatever business, and especially real es- tate interests, dictate. Especially with re- gard to such crucial issues as homeless- ness, the increasing gentrification of Ann Arbor, and a rational development policy, the best we can hope for is that a Demo- cratic city council will be more responsive to popular pressure for progressive poli- cies. vote Koib ported the proposed privacy ordinance, which limits landlords' ability to make unwanted, intrusive entries on tenants' premises. This ordinance is essential to protecting tenants rights. It is also sup- ported by the other Democratic candidates and some of the Republicans; Schleicher's opposition to this ordinance is truly inex- cusable. vote Spayth taken in sacrificing the needs of the poor to .the business community's apparently insatiable appetite for parking structures. .By the United Coalition Against Racism In the Fall of '87, in -the midst of an upsurge of racist violence, the United Coalition Against Racism (UCAR) de- manded that the University adopt a graduation requirement on race and racism. UCAR students worked with members of Concerned Faculty, Faculty Against Insti- tutional Racism (FAIR), as well as faculty at large for over a year to create the pro- posal that was presented to the LSA fac- ulty on February 6th. This proposal specifically outlined the format this requirement should take in ordet'to teach students about how and why racism and other forms of oppression still exist, and to guarantee the input of faculty and stu- dents of color.; Unfortunately, this* proposal is no longer on the written agenda for April's faculty meeting. On March 7, this group of faculty decided by a slim margin to change important guidelines in tie origi- nal proposal - changes that go against the spirit of the original student demand. This amended proposal has now been sub- stituted for the original proposal that was created out of the student struggles on this campus. One of the original requirements was for a seven faculty-two student committee to oversee the course. This committee was to include one faculty member from the Center of Afro-American and African Studies, Latino Studies and American Culture and Women's Studies programs; two current or past teachers of the course; 'On March 7, this group of faculty decided by a slim margin to change important guidelines in the original proposal - changes that go against the spirit of the original student demand.' two students from the Baker-Mandela Center and the Michigan Student Assem- bly; and two faculty at large. Though an oversight board remains, the new proposal empowers Dean Steiner (the LSA Dean and very individual that anti- racist forces have repeatedly struggles against) to appoint faculty from whichever department he chooses. This amendment continues the cycle of institutional racism on the administrative level, as the Dean can bypass faculty of color and women faculty to be on this committee. Theo- retically, this oversight board could be composed entirely of white men with little or no history of studying or struggling the origin and persistence of racism, anal- ysis of other forms of oppression, expo- sure to the experiences of people of color in this country through literature of other means, and. discussion of how to best ef- fect change. Most importantly, UCAR believes it is essential for this requirement to have the interdisciplinary focus few ex- isting courses have. People of color have been marginalized in almost every aspect of the University experience and society at large. One goal of the original proposals was not only to challenge the University's racist structure and practices, but to revise the way in which courses and requirements are against racism. The amended proposal also allows cur- rent courses that fulfill three of the six criteria stated in the proposal to satisfy this graduation requirement. Although it can be debated which three of the six criteria are the more important, we feel it is vital that the course adhere to all six. These criteria include a critical analysis of the concept of race, description of histori- cal and contemporary forms of racism in this country, competing explanations of administered. Rather than .employing the institutional structure which perpetuates racism, UCAR feels that the course must be rooted in the faculty and student -com- munities most affected by racism, and should be informed by 'the collective ex'periences and insights of those commu- nities as well. Though we applaud the sincerity of the efforts made by this group of faculty.to push this proposal forward, we can not support the amended proposal. Stop relocation of- the Navajo By Jeffrey L. Takacs 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;' (First Amend- ment to the United States Constitution.) 'In our traditional tongue, there is no word for relocation. To relocate is to move away and disappear.: (Pauline Whitesinger, Navajo elder.) Land is at the center of Navajo religion and life. Traditional Navajos practice their religion as their ancestors have for cen- turies by performing ceremonies and mak- ing prayer offerings at sacred places where they are able to communicate with the Creator. When a Navajo child is born, his or her umbilical cord is buried near .the home, creating a sacred and lifelong bond between the child and the land. The bury- ing of the umbilical cord symbolizes the transition from nourishment by one's nat- ural mother to Mother Earth. The bond between each individual and Mother Earth is nurtured through life as knowledge of sacred offering places is passed on from generation to generation. These offering places include springs, young trees, rocks, hills, burial sites, and areas where ceremonial herbs are gathered. trying to settle what was' presented to them as an intertribunal land dispute, (which Hope Elders deny, but the Bureau of Indian Affairs - B.I.A. - insists is dan- gerous) ordered some 13,000 Navajo Indi- ans to move off their ancestral homelands in the Big Mountain' area of Arizona. To force them to comply with the relocation order, Congress authorized the partitioning of the Navajo-Hopi Joint Use Area (part of the Navajo and Hopi Reservation in Ari- zona) and a 90% reduction in livestock, the mainstay of Navajo life and culture. Court orders stopped all construction and mandated a barbed wire fence dividing the land formerly shared by the two tribes. Now attorneys representing 45 of the es- timated 250 remaining Navajo have filed suit to block any further relocation. It just so happens that the 'relocatees' live on top of 19 billion tons of coal - a resource that Peabody Coal and other mineral compa- nies seek to control and develop. This is not the first time that the Navajo have been at the mercy of energy corporations and the federal government. Before 1960, the Kerr McGee corporation opened 42 uranium mines and 7 uranium mills on Navajo lands. Radiation levels at one mine, the Shiprock, were 90 times Because the Navajo. religion is so closely tied to the land, governmental ac- tion which forces the Navajo people from their land violates their right to religious freedom as guaranteed by the Free Exercise clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution. Forced relocation completely denies the Navajo's right to practice their religion. *Moreover, because there are several other solutions which would resolve the land dispute without requiring forced relocation, the Relocation Act is unconstitutional. To protect the right of traditional Navajo's to practice their religion, attor- neys from across the country have joined .together to prepare a class action lawsuit based on the legal protections of the First Amendment, the Religious Freedom Act of 1978, federal treaties and international human rights laws. The 'In Defense of Sacred' Lands' law- suit, known as Jenny Many Beads v. United States of America, was filed in federal district court in Washington, D.C., in Jan. 1988. Since then, the lawsuit was transferred to the federal courts in Arizona. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of the Navajos who wish to remain on their an-