According to the website, when
going over each case, HR will
focus on the nature and gravity
of the offense, the timeliness
and accuracy of the disclosure
and the relevancy to the role
held at the University.
HR’s statement explains the
policy is meant to preserve a
safe University community.
“Information about a faculty
or staff member’s criminal
activity helps the University
maintain a safe community and
prevent putting people at risk of
harm,” the statement reads.
At the CSG meeting, the
Carceral
State
Project,
an
initiative focused on issues
of
mass
incarceration
and
immigration
detention
in
Michigan, had representatives
speak against the University’s
new policy. In an open letter
to the University, the Carceral
State Project describes how
they believe the policy has
negative social and economic
consequences
for
those
on
campus.
“Taken
together,
these
policies
promote
over-
criminalization
rather
than
public safety, reinforce the
racial and economic inequalities
in the criminal justice system
and on our campus and have
other
devastating
collateral
consequences,” the letter reads.
Community member Patrick
Bates, who spent 17 years in
prison, described his personal
disappointment
with
the
University after hearing about
the new policy.
“At a very young age I caught a
felony, and due to that, I couldn’t
get any job, I couldn’t get into
really good schools or anything
like that …” Bates said. “I’ve
been trying to better myself and
I’ve been coming up here three
times a week from Detroit, and I
hear about this (the new policy);
I’m just so appalled about
what’s going on with this policy
… I know while I was inside, I
got an associate’s degree and I
did everything I could to better
myself, and I came home and
the conversation we had was
for me to come home and come
to the University of Michigan
and do the right thing. But, now
with this policy that’s being
enforced, what am I supposed
to do?”
Ashley
Lucas,
associate
professor of theatre and drama,
also spoke about the new felony
policy. She described how at last
Wednesday’s town hall meeting,
many faculty and staff members
thanked her for what she and
others are doing to push back
against the policy. However, her
colleagues said they would not
sign the open letter against the
new policy due to their fear of
losing their jobs.
“One of the things that’s
really frightening about this
policy is that it has frightened
so many of the people that
care about you as students
on campus,” Lucas said. “So,
the only reason that I’m here
tonight is to support the student
voice … but I’m also here to
represent the people that told
me they were too frightened to
speak.”
CSG Vice President Isabel
Baer said she heard that the new
policy was partially created in
response to faculty who have
been accused of sexual assault
charges. If the University chose
not to implement the policy,
she asked the proponents of the
resolution what solutions they
had to address faculty members
accused of committing sexual
assault.
In response, Public Health
junior Zoe Gerstle, a member of
the Prison Creative Arts Project,
described how she believed the
University should discuss with
experts on how to best deal with
issues of sexual misconduct,
rather than suggesting this new
felony notification policy as the
main solution.
“It’d be great if they (the
University)
consulted
the
experts at this university who
study things like this,” Gerstle
said. “They could create a policy
that’s going to be more effective,
as opposed to just handing
something down. So we don’t
necessarily have an answer
on how to deal with sexual
misconduct at this University,
but a great start would be
opening it up to the community
forum to see what people have
to say who are experts on this.”
Shifting
gears,
guest
speakers from 1U discussed the
drastic disparities among the
Ann Arbor, Flint and Dearborn
campuses,
financially
and
demographically.
According to the group’s
presentation, the median family
income for University students
in Ann Arbor is $154,000,
compared
to
$84,000
in
Dearborn and $77,000 in Flint.
In addition, there is a large gap
in the percentage of students
eligible to receive the Federal
Pell Grant at each campus, a
grant in which the government
provides funding for students
in need of financial support
for college. According to the
presenters, in Ann Arbor, 15
percent of students are eligible
for the grant, compared to the
39 percent eligible in Flint, and
42 percent in Dearborn.
To resolve these issues, LSA
junior
Sharif-Ahmed
Krabti
and members of the campaign
proposed several solutions. One
was to ask the state to equalize
funding for all three campuses.
Another was to encourage the
University’s Diversity, Equity
and
Inclusion
initiative
to
donate funding to the other
campuses, seeing that out of
the $85 million funneled into
the program over the past few
years, none of the money was
dedicated toward Dearborn or
Flint, according to Krabti.
“I think there’s a duty for
Ann Arbor students here on
this campus who are closest
to the administration to really
speak up the loudest about this
issue,” Krabti said.
When asked about what
suggestions the Assembly had
to promote equality across all
three campuses, LSA freshman
Sujin
Kim,
CSG
Ethics
Committee chair, responded
by encouraging the group to
spread awareness of these
disparities among the student
body.
Grand
said
the
new
amendment
would
allow
temporary city employees such
as election workers to be able
to sit on the commission. She
explained the councilmembers
edited the amendment to be
more specific.
“That was an oversight as
we were trying to write an
amendment that was slightly
broader than election workers,
because we recognized there
are others in the community,”
Grand said. “For example, we
might have a youth applicant
who is a summer camp worker
and we don’t want to preclude
that person from serving on
the community police oversight
commission.”
Councilmembers
Jane
Lumm, I-Ward 2, and Zachary
Ackerman, D-Ward 3, who serve
as the Council’s liaisons for the
police oversight commission,
sponsored
the
amendment,
along with Councilmember Ali
Ramlawi, D-Ward 5, and Grand.
Initially,
the
amendment
allowed the council to waive
the restriction, which requires
former
and
current
city
employees to wait a period of
five years from the end of their
employment
until
they
are
eligible to sit on a committee.
Councilmembers
altered
the language to specify the
restriction waiver applied to
temporary
or
seasonal
city
employees who received fewer
than seven paychecks from the
city in a year.
Councilmember Jack Eaton,
D-Ward 4, said he understood
residents’
concerns
over
the
initial
language
of
the
amendment posted in the agenda,
but believes the new amendment
addresses that concern.
“I believe that this is more
narrowly
tailored
than
the
language in the agenda, and it
won’t encompass any unintended
consequences,” Eaton said.
Grand and Lumm addressed
concerns about the nomination
process for the police oversight
committee but were met with
outbursts
from
the
crowd
criticizing what they saw as a
lack of transparency.
Dwight
Wilson,
who
is
a member of the city’s task
force for the police oversight
committee
and
the
Human
Rights Commission but was
absent at the council meeting,
had a statement read for him
during public comment. Wilson
urged the council to be as specific
as possible in their language.
“Rumor has it that even before
the independent police oversight
commission is appointed, forces
are at work to further weaken it,”
Wilson wrote in the statement.
“One assault is an amendment
that will open the door to city
employees,
even
policemen,
sitting on the commission.”
Ramlawi
stated
he
was
satisfied with the language of
the new amendment, but wished
there was more trust from
the community. He asked the
community for the “space and
trust” to do their work.
“There has been obviously a lot
of suspicion and we’re at a fragile
state of trust right now with this
new commission and we should
respect that and know that,”
Ramlawi said. “I think none of us
wish to alter the amendment too
great or at all until it is sat and
approved.”
At
several
points
while
Ramlawi spoke, an audience
member interrupted, demanding
to know why the council was
not being transparent about
the criteria for being on the
commission.
Ramlawi
said
the
qualifications
for
the
commission are outlined in the
amendment.
Councilmember Jeff Hayner,
D-Ward 1, opposed the new
amendment. He shared concerns
about any city employee being
on an independent oversight
committee
and
expressed
worry
about
the
vagueness
of the definition of a city
employee. According to Hayner,
city councilmembers are not
considered full-time employees
of the city.
“There’s a lot of terms that
need to be defined,” Hayner said.
“An independent body should not
have (employees) from the city
sitting on it. I would like to see
this body remain independent.”
Hayner and Councilmembers
Kathy Griswold, D-Ward 2, and
Elizabeth Nelson, D-Ward 4,
voted against the amendment,
which passed by an 8-3 vote.
Nelson sponsored her own
resolution to prohibit “undue
influence” from members of City
Council who are not liaisons to
the police oversight commission
or the city’s Human Rights
Commission. She said wanted to
have an open discussion about the
implementation of the ordinance
that laid the groundwork for the
police
oversight
commission,
noting that even though the
conversation was “a little bit
awkward,”
she
felt
strongly
about having it.
“(The) council was sent a
legal
memo
suggesting
that
the wording of my resolution
is overly restrictive in trying to
clarify this point,” Nelson said.
“I really struggled in writing
this
resolution
because
this
seems like common sense to
me that we would not use the
ordinance in this way or proceed
with the ordinance in this way.
I appreciate that all members of
our community, including city
staffers, including us members
of council, are free to volunteer
an opinion about an applicant
and share that opinion with any
of the four liaisons.”
She noted the liaisons had
a “special role” to play in the
process
of
recommending
applicants to sit on the police
oversight commission, but said
when she complained about who
would fill those positions, she
was told the goal was to achieve
balanced perspectives. Nelson
challenged Lumm for the liaison
position in December but failed
to win the needed majority
support from the council to take
the spot. She said she had taken
that as a cue to stay out of the
affairs of the councilmembers
who were designated as liaisons.
“My
resolution
includes
the
term
‘undue
influence’
to describe generally, that at
this stage in the process, none
of us, except for those four
liaisons, should be using our city
positions to exercise any more or
less influence than a community
member could,” Nelson said.
Nelson
criticized
Mayor
Christopher
Taylor
for
attending some of the liaisons’
meetings.
Taylor
disputed
Nelson’s characterization of his
involvement, noting the time
constraints on the effort and the
need to convene a commission
so the city could get its advice
before hiring a new chief of
police.
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
News
Wednesday, February 20, 2019 — 3A
Fourteen
companies
have
signed
on,
including
large
grocery distributors such as
Walmart
and
Whole
Foods
Market and fast food chains such
as Burger King, McDonald’s and
Subway.
While
the
resolutions
discussed by CSG, City Council
and MUBP are significant, the
University has not officially
commented on the situation
and could still offer Wendy’s
a vendor spot. In order for a
restaurant to be considered for
the vendor spot, the University
must first extend a bid to the
restaurant.
In
recent
reports,
Heidi
Schauer, Wendy’s director of
corporate
communications,
has said that the franchise
previously at the Union did
not submit a bid. However, it is
unclear if the University even
invited them to do so.
According to Kim Daley, a
postdoctoral fellow in the School
of Public Health and student-
activist, it’s still possible the
University will accept a bid from
Wendy’s, if a different Wendy’s
franchise was invited to submit
a bid. However, it is impossible
for activists to know as the
procurement process is secret.
Daley,
along
with
the
Washtenaw
Solidarity
for
Farmworkers, will speak at the
University’s Board of Regents
meeting on Thurs., Feb. 21 to
encourage
the
University
to
officially prohibit Wendy’s from
procuring a vendor spot until
the franchise adheres to the Fair
Food Program.
“We’re very excited and we do
think this is a win, but we also
want the president and the regents
specifically to still make a stand
and show that the University as
a whole cares about ethical labor
practices,” Daley said.
WENDY’S
From Page 1A
OVERSIGHT
From Page 1A
POLICY
From Page 1A
BARRIERS
From Page 1A
“Thinking about your overall
purpose
is
really
important
because the ‘why’ shapes the
‘how,’” Reynolds said. “What
work are you doing and why are
you doing it?”
Another
barrier
Reynolds
mentioned was how international
volunteers might have a difficult
time understanding the context
of a problem they are trying to
solve. Her advice to volunteers
was to research the history of a
problem before arriving.
“We have to understand issues
and know the root causes of the
issues,” Reynolds said. “If we
don’t know the root causes, our
work is not going to be effective
or sustainable for the community
we’re working in.”
The third barrier Reynolds
discussed
was
about
the
importance
with
which
volunteers
consider
their
identities
and
roles.
She
prompted the audience to think
about how their identities would
affect their experience in the
specific countries where they are
volunteering.
“Identities matter,” Reynolds
said. “Our social identities affect
how we shape the world around
us. Whatever you are doing, if
you are working with people, you
are in a social environment.”
She
also
discouraged
the
audience
from
ignoring
opportunities for mutual learning
and benefit. Reynolds said in
many cases, those going abroad
to volunteer will benefit more
than the communities they’re
visiting. To reduce this disparity,
she suggested volunteers think
about what they can learn from
community members and to
try to understand all parts of a
culture.
“Ask people, ‘What do you
want and what do you need
— what are your priorities?’”
Reynolds said. “If you’re going
to a place just to help people,
you’re not seeing the rich, lively,
positive pieces of the culture that
are there as well.”
To conclude her presentation,
Reynolds discussed volunteers’
problematic use of social media.
As an example, she brought up
the commonly posted photos of
University of Michigan students
in a foreign country with a maize
and blue block ‘M’ flag, and how
most people have not considered
the implications of the photo.
“What does it mean for people
to take a flag and put it up in a
space that has been previously
conquered
by
an
invading
country?” Reynolds said. “When
people from the United States
go to those countries and take
a big flag with them and post it
up, what does that mean to the
people you’re working with?”
Reynolds
offered
parting
advice for those volunteering
abroad on how to make the
largest impact and how to utilize
social media.
“Make a plan before you go
abroad,” Reynolds said. “And
when posting on social media,
use captions to tell stories, add
names and add what you learned
from those people.”
LSA
sophomore
Margo
Dickstein,
who
plans
to
volunteer in Israel this summer,
told The Daily after the event
that she hopes to gain a better
understanding of the Arab-Israeli
conflict, echoing Reynold’s point
of understanding the context
and history of one’s study-abroad
country.
“I’m a double major in poli-
sci and international studies, so
it’s good to gain international
experience,” she said. “But I also
think it’s important when you’re
studying a conflict to not just look
at it from the outside, but to see it
from the inside. I’m excited to see
it from a human perspective, not
just a bunch of numbers.”
Read more online at
michigandaily.com
CSG
From Page 1A
“Any
new
administration
especially, when there is a
change in party, there’s a sense
of ‘We’re going to fix things,
we’re going to reverse direction
on some things that have been
really bad,’” Donahue said. “But
with the Trump administration,
it was a really extraordinary
sense of declaring Year Zero.”
Donahue
outlined
three
phases in which the Trump
administration
worked
to
deregulate
environmental
policies.
The
first
phase
consisted of a series of executive
orders Trump issued loosening
regulations, including the “two-
for-one” executive order, which
required federal agencies to
eliminate two regulations for
each new regulation they sought
to implement.
“(Trump issued) the two-
for-one executive order to
eliminate two regulations for
every one new one,” Donahue
said. “And also a requirement
that
new
regulations
that
impose
compliance
costs
on the private sector have
to be offset by the repeal of
regulations that will reduce
compliance costs by at least
an equal amount. And in
that
calculation,
regulatory
benefits like health benefits or
other advantages that might be
provided by regulation are not
counted, which is a big deal.”
Donahue said while the Trump
administration was enthusiastic
about
deregulation
policies,
they widely ignored the typical
transition process in which civil
servants within environmental
agencies outline key functions
of the organization and explain
deregulation procedures.
“You have this very high
level of ambition coupled with
a disdain or failure to engage
with the sort of machinery of
changing the direction of the
federal regulatory apparatus,”
Donahue said.
Trump’s
executive
orders
demanded
the
review
and
reconsideration of some of former
President Barack Obama’s major
regulations, such as the Clean
Power Plan and clean water
standards known as the “Waters
of United States” rule.
Phase
two
of
Trump’s
deregulation,
Donahue
said,
was
suspending
compliance
dates of existing environmental
regulations.
This
suspension
prevents key industries from
having to follow the regulations
Trump
plans
to
eventually
repeal.
“The general idea is, ‘We want
to change the regulation, maybe
repeal them outright, maybe
make them less onerous for
industries or otherwise change
them, and while we’re doing that
we don’t want industry to have
to worry about complying with
them,’” Donahue said.
Donahue noted a suspension
on regulating glider vehicles —
heavy trucks sold as new despite
having old engines that do not
comply with the Clean Air Act.
“The proposed rule got a lot
of adverse comments, and so
what they did was they decided
they wanted more time to think
about it and they issued a letter to
the industry called a ‘No Action
Assurance,’
which
basically
said, ‘We’re not going to enforce
the emission limits on your
vehicles,’” Donahue said.
LSA sophomore Dylan Berger,
president of the University’s
chapter of College Republicans
and a columnist for The Daily,
did not attend Donahue’s talk,
but said in an email he agreed
with the Trump administration’s
efforts
to
repeal
existing
regulations. Still, Berger hopes to
see a more comprehensive review
of environmental initiatives by
the administration in the future.
“As Americans, nothing is
more important than protecting
our
beautiful
environment,”
Berger said in the email. “As
such, we must tackle climate
change and other threats to our
environment head on. However,
many of the regulations meant
to protect the environment have
fallen short of the mark. They do
little to protect the environment
while unnecessarily harming our
economy. I applaud the efforts
of the Trump administration
to repeal these ineffective and
harmful
regulations.
Going
forward, however, I’d like to
see the Trump administration
outline a clear plan to protect
both
our
environment
and
economy.”
On
the
campaign
trail,
Trump floated the possibility of
abolishing the Environmental
Protection
Agency
and
has
reiterated the idea since taking
office. First year Law student
Rebecca Maas attended the
event and expressed her surprise
over lack of support for the EPA.
“One
thing
that
perhaps
should not have surprised me
is that the EPA is facing so
many struggles with this new
administration, when before it
seemed that there was relatively
high bipartisan support for an
EPA, and now that bipartisan
support seems to be in danger,”
Maas said.
Donahue said the third phase
of the Trump administration’s
deregulation of environmental
policy is the actual act of
repealing regulations. Donahue
mentioned the act to repeal
the Clean Power Plan and its
replacement
with
“deficient”
alternatives.
Under
Trump,
the EPA proposed replacing
the Clean Power Plan with
the Affordable Clean Energy
proposal, which would allow
states to have more autonomy
in regulating greenhouse gas
emissions
from
coal-burning
power plants.
Donahue said this change was
one of the most aggressive efforts
to repeal regulations.
“The
transition
between
Obama and Trump is pretty
much the level of the sort
of violence of the change, is
unprecedented,” Donahue said.
“The harder Reagan transition
generated a lot of the law we see
cited … but I think it’s fair to say it
wasn’t nearly as far reaching and
Reagan’s regulatory people were
a lot more conventional in their
approach.”
Maas,
a
first
generation
college student whose family is
from Germany, said the lack of
political consensus surrounding
environmental protection was
unfamiliar to her.
“My
family
came
from
Germany, so I’m the first person
from my family to graduate from
an American college,” Maas
said. “For us, the whole idea
that people are arguing about
keeping the environment clean
is surprising because it is a very
high priority in Germany. So I
just hope in the future that both
parties can agree on ways to keep
our environment clean.”
Maas
said
she
believed
environmental protection should
not be a partisan issue.
“I think the environment is
important because regardless
of which party you are from,
you
only
get
one
world,”
Maas said. “I hope that the
current
administration
takes
environmental
issues
more
seriously
moving
forward,
though based on what we heard
about in this talk, I’m not sure if
that will happen.”
Read more online at
michigandaily.com