The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
News
Wednesday, November 1, 2017— 3A

proven to have the capability 
to be much faster and use 
significantly 
less 
propellant 

than regular rockets.

“With 
a 
standard 

conventional chemical rocket 
the gas leaving the back might 
be leaving at something like 
4 or 5 kilometers per second. 
Our systems can do 20, 30, 40, 
even over 100 kilometers per 
second of exhaust velocity. And 
that translates into allowing the 
spacecraft to go much faster, 
anywhere from twice to 10 
times as fast as a conventional 
spacecraft can go,” Gallimore 
explained.

With this technology, both 

robotic systems and people have 
the capability to be transported 
from one place to another 
in 
space, 
either 
using 
less 

propellant than a normal rocket 
or traveling there at a much 
faster rate. Both possibilities 
are of interest to NASA and have 
been invested in through the 
Next Step project, which has 
allowed researchers to develop 
these prototypes.

This technology is both 10 

times faster than any engine 
that is currently used in space 
and has broken NASA’s record 
for thruster speed made several 
years ago.

The 
next 
step 
for 
this 

research is to operate a thruster 
at al least 100 kilowatts for 100 
hours continuously. Gallimore 
is optimistic that by 2018, with 

minor 
modifications 
based 

on what they have learned 
from this round of testing, the 
thruster will be capable of going 
much more than 100 hours 
continuously.

Gallimore 
expressed 

appreciation that his research 
can coexist with his roles as 
dean of Engineering and a 
professor.

“One of the things I’m really 

happy about is how research, 
and the education of students 
through research, is something 
that the University of Michigan 
does very well, in comparison to 
many of our peer institutions. I 
am really fortunate as dean to 
be able to demonstrate this in 
person by my own research that 
I still do, and by the fact that I 
have amazing students,” he said.

This 
group 
includes 

Engineering graduate student 
Scott Hall, who worked as a 
research fellow with NASA 
on this project and has been 
offered a position to work at 
center 
where 
he 
conducted 

research 
after 
getting 
his 

Ph.D. He explained the test’s 
importance as the culmination 
of his own work with aerospace 
engineering.

“A pretty large team has 

been working on the project 
since well before I even came to 
grad school. It was an amazing 
experience to be a part of the 
passionate, 
dedicated 
group 

of engineers and technicians 
at NASA that I worked with 
to accomplish this test. I’ll be 
defending my dissertation based 
heavily on that experiment in a 
few weeks,” he said.

MARS
From Page 1A

those outside of the University 
of Michigan’s borders.

During the first few weeks 

of 
the 
initiative, 
Ashman 

said, CSG paid for the buses 
—about $800 per bus. With 
this, they were able to provide 
one shuttle every other week. 
Eventually, 
Meijer 
noticed 

high interest among students 
using the shuttle and offered 
to 
pay 
for 
the 
program 

themselves, 
which 
allowed 

two shuttles to run every 
week.

This year, however, Meijer 

discontinued funding as they 
begin to join recent trends 
to have groceries delivered 
directly 
to 
homes 
and 

students, so as to compete 

with other delivery services 
such as Amazon.

“They didn’t see the value in 

having a bus bring kids to their 
locations when their real goal 
was to have students order 
the groceries and have them 
delivered to them,” Ashman 
said.

CSG, 
unable 
to 
provide 

funding 
for 
what 
would 

amount to $1,600 per week, 
decided to cut the program 
from their budget. This was 
in order to continue paying 
for other programs such as 
Student Organization Funding 
Commission — which helps 
fund 
student 
organizations 

— as well as financial aid 
support.

“We tossed it around for a 

bit and ultimately decided we 
just couldn’t, we didn’t want 
to start it and stop it and we 

couldn’t eat that cost for a 
whole semester or a whole 
year,” Ashman said. “That was 
going to impact a lot of other 
stuff we wanted to do which 
was 
also 
important 
work. 

We didn’t want to make that 
commitment.”

Though CSG looked into 

other ways to provide students 
with a grocery shuttle, Ann 
Arbor public buses The Ride 
currently allow students direct 
transportation to off-campus 
grocery stores. Engineering 
sophomore Olivia Sun used 
these services last year, and 
said because of the options 
available to students she feels 
the need for a specific shuttle 
from CSG is not as significant.

“I heard about (the CSG 

Meijer shuttle), but I never 
used it,” she said. “I personally 
don’t see (its discontinuation) 

as an inconvenience to myself 
just because I was already able 
to take a (Ride) Bus to Meijer 
… since that bus already goes 
there I don’t see the need for 
there to be a specific shuttle 
just to go to Meijer.”

Addressing food insecurities 

on campus was a large part 
of the Shafer administration 
platform and an issue included 
as part of eMerge’s campaign 
last spring. CSG committees 
are currently working on other 
means to combat the issue, 
such as providing farmers 
markets 
on 
campus 
and 

partnering with dining halls to 
include fresh produce options 
within University dining. 

“We 
certainly 
have 
not 

forgotten about the issues of 
food insecurity and access to 
healthy foods on this campus,” 
Ashman said.

MEIJER
From Page 1A

over the past two weeks, 85 
percent of survey respondents 
believe housing in Ann Arbor 
is segregated by income level. 
26 percent of the respondents 
come from families making over 
$220,000 annually, while the 
second largest percentage was 
the 22 percent of respondents 
from families making $120,000 
to $150,000 annually. Less than 11 
percent of respondents come from 
families making less than $60,000 
per year.

In 2016, Michigan’s median 

household income was $52,492 
— a stark contrast to the median 
household income of $154,000 for 
University of Michigan students. 
Additionally, 
9.3 
percent 
of 

students’ families make upwards 
of $630,000 per year.

Willian further noted housing is 

segregated by student preferences, 
rather than solely by family income. 
She emphasized how athletes often 
choose to live by their practice 
facilities, most commonly in the 
Yost neighborhood, rather than 
other neighborhoods off-campus.

“I would also say housing is 

definitely segregated by where 

students prefer to live in addition 
to what they can afford,” she said. 
“To my understanding, many of 
the athletes live closer to where 
their practices are held. I live on 
South U near Central Campus, 
in a location that is close to my 
classes. I don’t really have to go 
near the sports complexes besides 
for on game day so I wouldn’t like 
to live too far away from Central. 
I also chose this location because 
there are many other apartment 
complexes in a close vicinity and 
a lot of the friends I made last year 
live in this area too.”

Engineering junior Siddharth 

Ramesh 
further 
supported 

this, stating though Ann Arbor 
certainly has an issue with 
expensive housing, he believes 
housing is expensive across the 
map — rather than segregated by 
certain neighborhoods.

“When I first started the 

search for a place off campus 
I 
was 
astonished 
by 
how 

expensive every place was. I 
would say that yes, housing off 
campus is segregated by price, 
but I think the primary factor 
is proximity to campus,” he 
said. “Apartments and houses 
closer to campus are a lot 
more 
expensive, 
apartments 

especially, and then they get 

cheaper as you go farther out.”

Ramesh said his hunt for 

housing was based around his 
own personal preferences, as 
he knew he would be paying a 
large amount for monthly rent 
regardless of location.

“Once I reconciled myself 

with the fact that I was going 
to be paying close to $1,000 per 
month for housing, I think my 
primary factors in determining 
where to live was how far the 
house was from where I studied 
plus from where my roommates 
studied plus area of common 
spaces plus food options near 
by,” he said.

The median rate for rent in 

Ann Arbor increased 14 percent 
from 2010 to 2015, reaching 
$1,075 per month — even as the 
amount of high-density housing 
has jumped by 32 percent — 
according to the U.S. Census 
Bureau. However, this data is for 
the entire city and may not be 
reflective of the cost of housing 
for students specifically, most of 
which are clustered downtown.

In fact, the survey showed 

the average monthly rent of 
respondents to be approximately 
$772.

Rather 
than 
living 
in 
a 

neighborhood after freshman 

year, many students choose 
to instead live in one of the 
numerous luxury apartments 
scattered across Ann Arbor, 
such as Landmark or Foundry 
Lofts. However, with monthly 
rates going for upwards of 
$1,000 per person, depending 
on the size of the apartment, 
these apartments only cater to a 
certain percentage of the student 
body. As developers constructed 
these high-rises in the center 
of the city, they touted the 
benefits of bringing an influx of 
wealth to the area. Furthermore, 
they 
initially 
believed 
the 

construction of such buildings 
would cause rental prices for 
houses further from campus to 
drop — a phenomenon that has 
not yet been proven.

In an interview with the 

Ann Arbor News in 2012, local 
commercial real estate agent 
Peter Allen said though the 
apartments are expensive, the 
average University student can 
afford to pay for convenience 
and extra amenities.

“The profile of students can 

afford these super ammenized, 
very convenient locations,” he said.

HOUSING
From Page 1A

in all these areas but I share 
the 
frustration 
effort 
from 

many students and also faculty 
and staff that it’s just too slow. 
Change isn’t fast enough.

TMD: Specifically to that 

point, 
there 
was 
Tabbye 

Chavous, 
the 
director 
of 

the 
National 
Center 
for 

Institutional Diversity, who was 
quoted back in February saying 
that “this Fall will likely have 
an appreciable difference on our 
faculty (in terms of diversity).” 
How are things on that front?

Schlissel: I don’t have faculty 

numbers. 
The 
DEI 
office, 

SCHLISSEL
From Page 2A

Read more at MichiganDaily.com

Read more at MichiganDaily.com

I’m sure, does. But programs 
are up and running in each of 
the schools and colleges that 
are designed to purposefully 
increase the diversity of the 
faculty, to use legal means, but 
to purposefully look for scholars 
that enhance the study of or the 
environment for diversity and 
inclusion on campus.

One of the programs that 

I think is the most robust 
is happening in our largest 
college, 
in 
LSA, 
there’s 
a 

postdoc 
program. 
Postdocs 

are potential faculty members 
who have already finished their 
Ph.D. They’re not quite ready 
necessarily for an independent 
faculty position but they come 
and work at the University for a 
year or two, they do a little bit of 
teaching, they continue working 
on their scholarship, and if their 
career progresses, we have an 
assistant 
professor’s 
position 

waiting for them. LSA began a 
program as part of their diversity 
plan to set aside quite a number 
of these postdoctoral slots for 
scholars that would help us 
either with the study of diversity 
or in building a more diverse and 
equitable community. They’re 
making good progress on that, 
so that’s an example, but I don’t 
have the numbers to share with 
you.

There’s a lot of information in 

this and I’m still absorbing the 
information. We’ll have plenty 
of time at the diversity summit 
to actually discuss and answer 
questions about the information, 
and then the data will be made 
available so that individuals can 
look at the data and draw some of 
their own conclusions.

TMD: One of the things we 

wanted to address was your 
support for undocumented and 
immigrant students, specifically 
at the Regents meeting earlier 
this month. What has come out of 
the immigration working group? 
Has there been any progress on 
requests from students, such as 
liaisons, or financial aid? Where 
are we with that?

Schlissel: This immigration 

working group continues to 
function. 
It 
interacts 
with 

both 
individuals 
and 
then 

organizations 
representing 

groups of individuals. It has 

received a bunch of requests 
most recently from students in 
support of our DACA students, 
and a number of these things 
have been put into place. It’s 
mainly making sure that our 
entire community that is subject 
to these changes in immigration 
rules and regulations knows 
where to turn for information 
and knows where to turn when 
they need help. So we continue 
to improve our ways of making 
it easier for people to reach out 
and to know who to reach out 
to. But the important thing from 
the University perspective is we 
wouldn’t be Michigan without 
being a magnet for people from 
all around the world — and at all 
levels: faculty, staff and students. 
For students, we’re committed 
to all the students that are here, 
helping them achieve their life 
ambition. As a lifelong educator, 
the notion that somebody wants 
to make their life and their 
family’s lives better by getting 
educated — there’s nothing more 
worthy of support than that. 
We’re at the stage now, though, 
where also our professional 
organizations 
are 
lobbying 

Congress to come up with a 
more definitive solution to the 
DACA situation. So the DACA 
was a set of regulations that, you 
saw from recent events, could 
be overturned. The government 
changes, 
you 
overturn 
the 

regulations. The hope is to turn 
the DACA situation into a law — 
an act of Congress — that will 
give long-term assurance and 
stability to young people that are 
in the DACA category.

The other thing that really 

weighs on me is 20 percent of the 
Michigan faculty was born outside 
the United States. Just think of 
the advantage that our University 
and our country has by being a 
magnet for talent from all around 
the world. Why would we want 
to give that up? Why wouldn’t 
we want talented, hardworking 
people to come here and join our 
country and contribute to our 
shared wealth? So that’s why 
the immigration issue is really 
important for the University.

TMD: Shifting gears toward 

C.C. Little. So there’s an advisory 
committee for its renaming. What 
progress has been made in that 

committee, what have the main 
considerations been, and what 
does the timeline look like?

Schlissel: As you know because 

you published this, there has 
been a formal request, very well 
documented, made by a group of 
students with some faculty help — 
or maybe for my faculty colleagues 
I should say faculty with some 
student help — making a request 
that we consider removing the 
name. C.C. Little, of course, is a 
former president of the University 
and it’s a big deal. A year ago, 
we had a committee that has 
existed for a while called the 
President’s Advisory Committee 
on University History go through 
a discussion to advise us about 
what are the criteria we should 
use when these kind of questions 
come up. So that was before we 
ever got the C.C. Little question or 
Winchill — another former faculty 
member who has a hall named 
after them — where the question 
has also been raised over whether 
that naming is appropriate. So 
this committee spent a number 
of months saying what are the 
criteria we should use to judge 
these cases, how do we even think 
about a request to change a name? 
They came up with a bunch of 
recommended principles — those 
are posted up on my website for 
the whole community to see. And 
they’re a very valuable guide for 
how we deal with the proposal 
that was raised with C.C. Little. 
So what I did when I got the 
request for the Little naming was 
first look at the overall request to 
make sure it seems serious to me 
and detailed enough to forward 
to the committee and I thought 
it was and the committee agreed. 
The committee has been working 
on this request now for a few 
months. What they’ve been trying 
to do is apply their criteria to this 
particular question.

For example, one of the more 

interesting 
and 
challenging 

criteria is: You can imagine there 
are many ideas that in today’s 
context seem ridiculous, that 
they’re so out of step with our 
current values and the current 
social norms in our society that 
they make no sense. 

