The Committee on Open Expression has concluded that the April 15 theft of nearly 14,000 copies of The Daily Pennsylvanian violated the University's open expression guidelines, according to a letter from the committee chairperson to Vice Provost for University Life Kim Morrisson. Morrisson had asked the committee to make a determination "for the benefit of the Judicial Inquiry Officer and as a guidance for future action of members of the University community." Morrisson said Monday night that the JIO will investigate the April 15 incident, using the committee's interpretations as a guide. In the letter, which is printed in the May 10 Almanac, Committee Chairperson Ann Matter said her committee would begin working in the fall to incorporate a section prohibiting the confiscation of campus publications into the open expression guidelines. The committee found that the theft of DPs violated the guidelines, as long as the act was "done with the intent to impede the circulation of ideas" by members of the University community, according to the letter. In a subsequent letter to Morrisson -- also printed in this week's Almanac -- Religious Studies Professor Matter clarified what the committee meant, saying there must be intent "to stop a voice from being heard" for an open expression violation to occur. Matter noted, for example, that if publications are "inadvertently" thrown away, that would not, "strictly speaking," be a violation of the open expression guidelines. Morrisson said publications could be "inadvertently" thrown away if, for example, "somebody . . . might be cleaning the area and throw some [publications] away." In the second letter, Matter said the committee's wording in the earlier letter had been "deliberately vague" to allow the JIO "maximum freedom of interpretation" in determining specific cases.
Below are your search results. You can also try a Basic Search.
What the city first tried with garbage the University may now try with some trash of its own. The University is considering its own run at privatization by selling all three High Rises to private investors, according a report obtained by The Daily Pennsylvanian. The report, written by Vice Provost for University Life Kim Morrisson, outlines a proposal to sell the buildings for $7 million each in an effort to eliminate the University's $19.5 million deficit. "We knew they were a mistake to begin with," Morrisson said last night of the three concrete structures that dominate Superblock. "But we thought we'd be able to stand them longer than this." Morrisson said that several developers are interested in the property but would not give any further details about the plan. But Michael Karp, owner of University City Housing and one of the area's top slumlords, said he is very interested in talking to University officials about buying the buildings. "They're nicer than anything I own," said Karp, whose holdings include Hamilton Court and dozens of student-occupied houses in the area. "The only drawbacks are the elevators, which never seem to be working, and the cardboard walls. "But for $21 million, they'd have to throw in Hill House, too," he added. Both Karp and Morrisson stressed that students would still be able to call the 24-story, broken-down monstrosities their homes away from home -- and at markedly reduced rent. "Thank God," said Engineering junior Eric Grasser, who has lived in the same miserable High Rise South room for the past three years. "I couldn't bear the thought of having to move off campus. It's not safe out there, you know. Here we have round-the-clock security guards to protect us." President Sheldon Hackney said last night that in addition to reducing the University's budget shortfall, the proposed High Rise sale would help Residential Living avoid an impending budget crunch. But he added that he personally had been in favor of blasting the hell out of them. "It doesn't matter who owns them, I can still see the damn things from my bedroom window," Hackney said, his southern twang twanging away. "But maybe not for long...um...I mean, well...ha ha ha ha." One casualty of the sale would be Residential Living Director Gigi Simeone. Morrisson said Simeone's job responsibilities would be reduced so that she could concentrate on running the Quad mail room and keeping McGinn security guards on their toes. Simeone took the news in stride last night, adding that she would "look into the problem by the end of the semester."
With only one month left, the Penn's Way charity campaign is only about one-third of the way to its goal of $425,000 in pledges, University officials said yesterday. Pledged contributions totalled $145,500 as of November 20, according to Barabara Murray, a Penn's Way pledge processor in the comptroller's office. She said yesterday that last year's campaign had already reached $200,000 by the same time. In a statement in this week's Almanac, President Sheldon Hackney asked University employees to consider making contributions, pointing out that the "first half indicators are not rosy." But Linda Hyatt, co-chairperson of the campaign operations committee, said she is hopeful that pledges from faculty and staff will pick up before the two-month campaign ends on December 31. Hyatt, the acting executive director of the president's office, noted that some people typically wait until the end of December to pledge money for tax purposes. Last year's campaign exceeded its target of $400,000, bringing in nearly $410,000. The goal for the current campaign was raised to $425,000 in anticipation of similar success. At its present rate, however, total donations to this year's campaign could fall well short of its target. Hyatt attributed the current disappointing results to a number of factors, including the economy's continued sluggishness. But she also pointed to some changes made in this year's campaign as possible explanations. Unlike last year, when the University relied on volunteers in each department to coordinate the pledges, the campaign this year has mailed materials directly to employees via intramural mail, according to Hyatt. At the same time, she said, the campaign has used electronic mail more heavily than paper mail this year for spreading information about the program. Hyatt said that while both changes were designed to increase privacy and efficiency and to reduce waste, they may have also inadvertently lowered the campaign's overall visibility. Another possible explanation for the drop-off, she said, is that the "novelty" of the new combined campaign among employees is beginning to wear off in its second year. The charity campaign was redesigned in the spring of 1991, after faculty and staff complained that they could only give money to groups that were administered by the United Way. Under the combined campaign, employees can still give money to the United Way-sponsored funds. But now they can also donate to several independent umbrella charity groups, such as Women's Way and the United Negro College Fund. "For some people, the newness of having a combined campaign may have worn off a bit," she said. John Kehoe, a financial analyst in the executive vice president's office and another co-chairperson of the campaign's operations committee, expressed what he called "cautious optimism" that pledges will pick up in the next month. He said he feels that donations are "pretty much on track," noting that there is still a month left in the campaign. United Way spokesperson Joe Divis echoed Kehoe's optimism. "The campaign's not over yet," he said last night. "As long as there's time, you can still hope people will consider those who are less fortunate. Their needs are greater than ever."
and JORDANA HORN Five witnesses, including Mayor Ed Rendell's chief of staff, testified for the University Wednesday on the last day of the Mayor's Scholarship trial in the final act of the 13-month case. It is not clear when Common Pleas Court Judge Nelson Diaz will hand down a decision on the case, but both sides have said that they will appeal if they lose. The University took just half a day to present its defense. By contrast, the Public Interest Law Center, which is representing the plaintiffs, devoted two full days replete with the testimony of more than 30 witnesses in making its case. Rendell's Chief of Staff David Cohen reaffirmed the city's support of the University's position in the case, and praised the University for agreeing recently to voluntarily increase its scholarship commitment. Cohen also contradicted the earlier testimony of former Mayor Wilson Goode, who said Tuesday that he believed throughout his tenure as mayor, that the University had not lived up to its scholarship obligation. The Common Pleas Court trial was supposed to settle a lawsuit filed in October 1991 against the University over the number of scholarships the University is required to distribute annually to Philadelphia students. The lawsuit, filed by labor unions, student groups and several individuals, claims that a 1977 city ordinance requires the University to award 125 scholarships to Philadelphia high school graduates in each University class, for a total of 500 at a time. The University, however, maintains that it is required by the disputed ordinance to provide a total of 125 scholarships at a time in return for rent-free city land. Cohen testified that Goode told him in late 1991 that the plaintiffs' claims were "essentially non-meritorious," but that city lawyers recommended that the city intervene on the side of the plaintiffs. Cohen's statements appeared to contradict Goode's testimony from the day before, during which the former mayor said he supported the plaintiffs' goals in the suit. "I felt confident that [PILCOP] would pursue . . . the same kind of issues I would have pursued, had I been involved," Goode had said. Goode decided to delay the city's intervention, but urged incoming-Mayor Rendell to side with the plaintiffs. Rendell, however, chose to disregard Goode's recommendation and align the city with the University in the lawsuit. Former University President Martin Meyerson began the day's testimony by denying that the University ever agreed to the alleged increase. Arthur Makadon, the University's outside lawyer in the case, asked Meyerson whether the University intended to quadruple its scholarship commitment in 1977, as plaintiffs in the case maintain. "Did not," he replied tersely. Other witnesses for the University included a former city deputy mayor, a former city representative and Robert Zemsky, the University's planning director, who was the director of planning analysis for the University in 1977. Diaz asked each witness except Cohen if they had been personally involved in negotiations with City Council in 1977, when Council drafted the disputed ordinance. The witnesses said they had not been directly involved.
During the year-long battle over Mayor's Scholarships, the legal debate has sometimes -- some say often -- slipped out of law and into the realm of pure politics. But there has been another kind of politics in the case and it has been sitting right under the judge's nose all along -- at the lawyers' tables. Both Arthur Makadon, the University's lawyer, and Thomas Gilhool, an attorney with the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia, have been involved in area politics for years. Makadon is a longtime friend and advisor of Mayor Ed Rendell. They met during the late 1960s, when the two worked at the district attorney's office. Last night, Rendell said Makadon is "certainly one of my closest outside-the-government advisors." Makadon served as finance chairperson during Rendell's unsuccessful 1987 mayoral campaign, and he introduced Rendell to David Cohen, who is now the mayor's chief of staff. In 1990, Philadelphia Magazine said Makadon himself was "definitely the stuff for higher office," noting that he had turned down an offer to become the city's chief lawyer. But despite both the rumors and his political connections, Makadon said yesterday that he will stick to law. "I'm getting too old for that kind of stuff," he said. "That's a different grind." Makadon also said that his involvement in the Mayor's Scholarship case has nothing to do with his close ties to Rendell. "I got involved in this case long before Rendell was mayor," he said. Until Rendell announced his support of the University's position last winter, it was not clear which side the city would take. The city's siding with the University appears to have helped the University's position in the case. On the other side of the courtroom is Gilhool, one of four PILCOP attorneys handling the Mayor's Scholarship case for the plaintiffs. Gilhool has been with PILCOP since the 1970s, but left in 1987 for a two-year stint as Pennsylvania's secretary of education. His tenure in Harrisburg ended in 1989, when he resigned after a battle over funding for special education. Gilhool then began teaching eighth grade at a local inner-city public school. But a controversy soon arose over whether Gilhool had bypassed hiring regulations by tapping connections in the school district's administration. After teaching for a year, Gilhool returned to PILCOP in 1990, where he is currently chief counsel. In 1991, the Philadelphia Bar Association awarded him the prestigious Obermayer Award for work in education. He recently rejoined the political world when he and his wife, Gillian, co-chaired Jerry Brown's 1992 presidential campaign in Pennsylvania. All three were classmates together in the Yale Law School class of 1964. Both Makadon and Gilhool have also had past professional dealings with the University. Gilhool, through PILCOP, represented students and student groups in a 1986 suit against the University that led to the University's divestment of companies doing business in South Africa. The suit sought to reverse a decision by the University's Board of Trustees to delay complete divestment. It claimed that Trustees had violated state open meeting laws and had not properly disclosed possible conflicts of interest. Two months after the suit's filing, the Trustees voted again, this time deciding to sell all University holdings in those companies. Gilhool's fellow PILCOP attorney Michael Churchill, who is also working on the Mayor's Scholarhip case, was co-counsel in the suit. Makadon most recently represented the University in the government's lawsuit against members of the Ivy Overlap Group, a group of private colleges and universities which shared financial aid information. The federal government first investigated and later sued all eight Ivy League schools and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology over their participation in Overlap. The University and the other Ivies signed a consent decree last year promising to stop sharing financial aid information. Only MIT decided to fight the government and was found guilty last summer of violating anti-trust laws. Philadelphia Magazine, in the same article about city lawyers, called Makadon "a brilliant litigator." He is head of litigation at his law firm, Ballard, Spahr, Andrews and Ingersoll, which has represented the University in other cases as well.
Asked in June when he will step down as the University's president, Sheldon Hackney gave a typical response -- he cracked a joke. "There will be a flash of inspiration or someone will pour a bucket of something over my head," he said facetiously. These days, however, the comings and goings of the University's leaders are hardly a laughing matter. With one top administrator gone, another recently almost hired away and Hackney himself rumored to be leaving soon after the $1 billion capital campaign is completed next year, the University could be in for some big changes at the top. Exactly when those changes come is anyone's guess. Both Hackney and Provost Michael Aiken -- who was recently passed over in his bid for the presidency of the University of Texas at Austin -- are close-mouthed about their futures. Whenever it happens, the question will be the same: will the loss of experience have a destabilizing effect, or will it allow new leaders to reinvigorate the administration with their new ideas? Many say that while the current administration has done a good job, new blood would not necessarily be a bad thing, as long as it does not all happen at once. "Anytime there is a change in leadership, there's always a huge potential for new and positive changes," Undergraduate Assembly Vice Chairperson Kirsten Bartok said earlier this month. She said that with the capital campaign nearly over, Hackney will have completed one of his major goals as president. The time is near, she said, for a new president with new goals. "One hopes there aren't seismic shifts like they had at Yale," said Statistics Professor David Hildebrand, chairperson of the Faculty Senate. "But we need to accept, as a University, the continuing change of people. That's just a fact of life." The situation at Yale, where President Benno Schmidt and two top administrators resigned within months of each other last year, is not likely to occur at the University. Administration officials note that the University expects to have a replacement for former Executive Vice President Marna Whittington within a couple of months. By the time either Aiken or Hackney might leave, they say, that person should have enough experience to help maintain continuity at the top. And whenever Hackney or Aiken decides to step down, the other could delay his departure to avoid a one-two blow. Aiken's seven-year term as provost runs through 1994, and while he can leave before it is over, the provost is not required to change over with the president. UA Chairperson Jeff Lichtman said that even if Aiken and Hackney both depart soon, the result could still be beneficial. "While they may leave tremendous voids, it is an amazing opportunity for us students and faculty in one fell swoop to give some ideas as to how to direct the University into the 21st century," he said earlier this month. Others at the University say the effects of the departures will be minimal because the administrators have managed the University well during their tenures. Vice Provost for University Life Kim Morrisson said that the University has had "consistent leadership" during Hackney's nearly 11 years in office. She said that while there is "always a little jolt" when changes first occur, there is also a "source of stability within the [University]" that would help lessen the shock. Social Work Professor Louise Shoemaker, past chairperson of the Faculty Senate, said that although now is "not a good time to have a lot of rocking of the boat," the University is "in a fiscally more sound position" than many peer institutions because of good management. Whittington, who stepped down from her position as the University's chief financial officer in September to work for a private investment management firm, described the changes as "a natural process." "Every university goes through orderly transitions in leadership as one generation of leaders finishes their terms and another generation begins," she said yesterday. In recent weeks, Hackney's future has become grist for the rumor mill. Some have predicted that President-elect Clinton will find a spot for him in the new administration, although Hackney has denied this possibility. But there is general agreement that whatever his plans may be, Hackney -- the second-longest serving Ivy League president -- does not have any obligation to pass that information on to the University community.
Vice Provost for University Life Kim Morrisson and some Greek leaders said Thursday that they are disappointed with the behavior of students at the Interfraternity Council's bid signing meeting Monday night. At one point during the meeting, several students in the crowd began hooting and whistling at Tricia Phaup, director of the Office of Fraternity and Sorority Affairs, as she walked to the podium to address the audience. Morrisson said the behavior does not "speak well" for the Greek system at the University and that Greek leaders "need to recognize that and deal with it." Panhellenic Council President Debbie Frank and Bicultural Intergreek Council President Mia Piggee joined Morrisson in criticizing the students' behavior. IFC President Jeffrey Blount, who defended the meeting's overall program, acknowledged that the behavior of "those few members" was "inappropriate and cannot be excused." He also criticized The Daily Pennsylvanian's account of the meeting for "neglecting to mention" parts of the program dealing with issues such as acquaintance rape and drug and alcohol awareness. "Yes, some people did things that were inexcusable," he said Thursday. "But that is exactly why we hold programs like the one on bid night -- so that we can teach and educate the members of the Greek system about different people's views and feelings." Blount said the IFC has the "record to prove" that houses have been heavily involved in awareness programs, adding that he was "100 percent certain" that upperclassmen in the Greek system would not exhibit similar behavior. Despite her criticism, Morrisson said the University would not take any action towards the IFC. "It's an educational process, partly, and the system itself has to respond and take some leadership in that process," she said. "There is leadership within those houses that presumably should be working with [new members]." "I think that an educational process takes time," she added. "I hope it is enough. If it is not, I think that would be a very sad statement and would only add to my disappointment." But Piggee said that those programs may not be enough to prevent a repeat of the bid night behavior, especially because the rushees were not even officially members of the system. And she said that Greek leaders who were present bear some of the responsibility for the behavior because they should have done more to stop the whistling and hooting. "I think that they at least had a responsibility to do something, should at least have stepped in, just out of respect for [Phaup]," she said. Piggee added that there should have been "some kind of sanctions on the bids," possibly even denying bids to the offending students. "Shoot, if you don't have any respect for the system right now, why should I give you the bids?" she said. Frank said yesterday that Panhel "does not condone the sexist attitudes portrayed by many" at the bid meeting. "With many strong, intelligent women in our system, we are prepared to aid individual fraternities in quickly facilitating educational programs, which specifically address sexual harassment," she said. Phaup could not be reached for comment last night.
President-elect Clinton will likely end the long-running campus debate over ROTC by lifting the military's ban on homosexuals when he takes office in January. Clinton promised during the campaign to end the ban if elected. During a speech Tuesday, he publicly reaffirmed that pledge for the first time since last week's election. Once the policy change is carried out, University President Sheldon Hackney will no longer have to decide whether to oust the Reserve Officer Training Corps for violating the University's non-discrimination policy. "If the discrimination problem is really taken care of -- and that is a legitimate if -- then it would certainly seem to make [the ROTC issue] moot," Faculty Senate Chairperson David Hildebrand said yesterday. University Council, the president's advisory board, passed a resolution last year calling on Hackney to kick the Army and Navy ROTC units off campus by next June if the military's ban on homosexuals had not been lifted by then. Hackney has put off making a decision since then, saying that he would continue lobbying the government to change the policy and would await the outcome of this year's election. The decision would have been a tough one. Hackney faced the dilemma of possibly violating the University's non-discrimination policy or eliminating a program that provides scholarships to many students and contributes to the diversity of the student body, as ROTC does. Hackney could not be reached for comment yesterday, but Assistant to the President Nicholas Constan said he thinks Hackney is "very much relieved" that he no longer has to make that choice. But Hildebrand said Council should wait until Clinton actually issues an executive order reversing the ban before deciding whether to withdraw its resolution calling for the ROTC removal. Jason Walthall, co-chairperson of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual Alliance, praised Clinton yesterday for reaffirming his promise. "It's something long overdue for our society," he said. "I have high hopes that [Clinton] will follow through with the promise." Walthall added that he considers ROTC "in itself a great program," and that he hopes the ROTC debate will end once the military's ban is reversed. Captain Sandy Stoddard, commanding officer of the Naval ROTC unit at the University, would not comment on how the end of the ban would affect the University's ROTC units. Citing military regulations that do not allow him to publicly make any personal statements, he said only that if Clinton lifts the ban, NROTC would "follow that new direction." Several University students who are ROTC members also declined to discuss the effects of an executive order ending the ban.
University Council members sparred in a heated debate yesterday over who -- if anyone -- should be allowed to take pictures of individuals who violate University open expression guidelines and then refuse to identify themselves. After a lengthy debate at yesterday's Council meeting, two proposals designed to help the University identify and punish violators were put off for further discussion. One plan, supported mainly by faculty, would change current policy to allow University Police officers to take the pictures, and then give the cameras to someone from the Office of the Vice Provost for University Life for identification purposes. Currently, police officers are specifically prohibited from taking the pictures, which are reportedly destroyed once the student in question is identified. The other plan, supported by students, would eliminate the photographs and instead subject individuals who refuse to identify themselves "to normal police procedure, including arrest and fingerprinting." Under the current system, people who violate the University's open expression guidelines -- during campus rallies or protests, for example -- may be reprimanded by an open expression monitor and asked to identify themselves so that charges can be pressed. If the violators do not give their name, their picture is taken and they are later identified. Currently, photographs may be taken by anyone except police officers. Backers of the first proposal yesterday, led by Statistics Professor and Faculty Senate Chairperson David Hildebrand, say it would make life easier for open expression monitors. They say that many monitors do not like taking the pictures because they fear the possibility of physical violence and because many monitors have University jobs which require them to be student advocates. But the other plan's supporters contend that pictures are not enough to make a definite identification, and argue that University officials should not be photographing students anyway. Undergraduate Assembly member David Rose, the spokesperson for this plan, said at the meeting that letting officers take pictures was a "non-option." And UA member Ethan Youderian, a College junior, echoed Rose, saying the "main issue was that students didn't want to be photographed." But Hildebrand said arresting students for refusing to say who they are is too drastic, especially compared with the option that he supports. And Provost Michael Aiken disputed the notion that pictures cannot be used to identify students at such a large institution as the University. He said the University has successfully used them in the past as means of identifying students. Throughout the debate, arguments and counterarguments were hurled back and forth, occasionally sparking hot tempers. Mathematics Professor Peter Freyd criticized the second plan and said "there's no way" police officers would arrest someone just because they refused to identify themselves. UA member Jorge Espinel, a College sophomore, made an ominous comparison between the plan to let officers take pictures and a photo file which the University is rumored to have kept on some students during the 1960s. "The photographs bring out that fear again," he said. In other business, Council approved revisions to the Council Committee on Undergraduate Admissions and Financial Aid in a 20-9 vote that was split largely on faculty-student lines. The committee, which was changed to reduce overlap with the Provost's Committee on Undergraduate Admissions, will extend its reach to include graduate students once the revisions take effect. Prior to the vote, several student members, including Rose, Bartok and UA Chairperson Jeff Lichtman, questioned the possibility of increasing student representation on the provost's committee. Council also voted by a 16-10 margin to make 85 decibels the new noise level for gatherings on College Green and Locust Walk. Exceptions will be allowed for special events, such as Hey Day and Spring Fling.
Faced with declining occupancy, deteriorating facilities and rising security costs, the Department of Residential Living is heading towards a money crunch. "It's a problem," Vice Provost for University Life Kim Morrisson said last night. "We're not at a crisis point, but we will be soon unless we begin to address [the funding issue]." Morrisson said Residential Living "needs an infusion of funds" to solve the problems of on-campus living that have pervaded for the past few years. The growing problems facing Residential Living are detailed in a report by Morrisson on long-term plans for the University's residential living programs, including a proposal to expand the University's current college house system. Morrisson said the college house proposal stemmed in part from a realization by University officials that, with major costs ahead, it was necessary to reassess the University's residential living goals. "Because we need to make those kinds of investments, we need to decide what direction we're moving in," she said. One of the main areas of rising costs is security. The residential budget, which pays for 28 percent of the University's Public Safety budget, has funded a large part of the University's increased campus security in recent years. Between fiscal years 1986 and 1993, Residential Living's share of non-residential security costs -- such as hiring new police officers -- increased by 106 percent, while total revenues for the department increased by just 41 percent, the report says. Increased security costs, along with bigger utility bills and declining occupancy, in turn reduced Residential Living's ability to fund building renovations. During the same seven-year period, according to the report, money to repair the residences decreased by 34 percent, while the amount of necessary repairs increased by 160 percent. The delay in renovations to make the buildings more attractive -- coupled with higher rent in dormitories -- resulted in an even greater decline in residence occupancy. This, in turn, decreased revenues still further, according to the report. "This pattern results in a downward spiral -- fewer students producing less revenue each year for facilities improvements," the reports says. Residential Living is financially self-sufficient, meaning that it can only spend however much -- or little -- it makes in rent payments from students each year. The University's residential living problems are not unique. According to the report, many of the University's "sister schools" -- particularly those with residential buildings at least 50 years old -- now face "massive rehabilitation costs and/or the need for new construction." The report says, for example, that Brown University proposed a $33 million building improvement plan in 1990, and that Cornell University recently implemented a $73 million renovation program.
University Council members will vote at today's meeting on proposed revisions to the Council Committee on Undergraduate Admissions and Financial Aid, trying to prevent overlap with a similar committee overseen by the provost's office. The proposed revisions would expand the Council committee's reach to include the University's graduate schools. Currently, the committee can only consider admissions and financial aid matters for the four undergraduate schools. Council members have said in the past that the revisions would reduce overlap with the Provost's Committee on Undergraduate Admissions, which has greater impact on University policy since Council is only an advisory body to President Sheldon Hackney and cannot implement policy. At today's meeting, Council will also revisit the issue of whether University Police officers should be allowed to take photographs of individuals who violate the University's open expression guidelines and refuse to identify themselves. In the past, some Council members have opposed plans to allow pictures to be taken by officers, instead of open expression monitors, who have said they do not want the responsibility. Social Work Professor Louise Shoemaker, past chairperson of the Faculty Senate, said last night that she understood those concerns. "Given the world's history, [police officers taking photographs] could be sort of frightening," she said. "I understand why students feel the way they do, but there has to be some way of being able to keep civility in disputes." The meeting will also include a presentation from Ira Harkavy, vice dean of the College, on the recently established Center for Community Partnerships, which he has directed since its founding last summer. Harkavy said he plans to discuss "why it's particularly significant for the University of Pennsylvania to be involved in helping to solve the problems of the American city." The meeting will be held in Hoover Lounge of Vance Hall today at 4 p.m.
Provost Michael Aiken was passed over Friday in his bid for the presidency of the University of Texas at Austin, losing out to a top administrator at the University of Illinois. The University of Texas System Board of Regents unanimously selected Robert Berdahl, vice chancellor at Illinois, from a list of five finalists that included Aiken, following a final round of interviews in Dallas last week. Louis Beecherl, chairman of the Board of Regents, said in a statement that Berdahl "has the administrative experience, the academic stature and the vision to provide dynamic leadership" for UT-Austin, adding that Berdahl was chosen from "an extremely strong field of candidates." Aiken, the University's provost since 1987 and a former dean of the School of Arts and Sciences, would not comment yesterday on the decision or say whether he is interested in the presidency of any other college or university. Had he been offered the UT post, Aiken could have become the second top University administrator to leave the University in recent months. Former Executive Vice President Marna Whittington stepped down from her job as the University's chief financial officer in September to work for a private investment management firm. Statistics Professor David Hildebrand, chairperson of the Faculty Senate, said Friday that he has "truly mixed feelings" about Aiken not being offered the UT presidency. "If he wanted to [become UT president], he is a good man and I would like to see him attain his wishes and goals," he said. "At the same time, I would be glad to have him stay around for the continuity and leadership that he provides." Michael Goldstein, former chairperson of the Graduate and Professional Student Assembly, expressed similar sentiments. Goldstein said last night that although he is "sorry for [Aiken], it's probably good for Penn." And while he predicted that UT will eventually realize they "made a mistake" in not choosing Aiken, he said he is "sure there will be more offers" for Aiken to become president of another university sometime in the future.
Provost Michael Aiken, one of five finalists for the presidency of the University of Texas at Austin, will learn today whether he has a new job. The University of Texas Board of Regents plans to name the university's next president this afternoon in Dallas, according to James Duncan, the UT system's executive vice chancellor for academic affairs and head of the search committee. Duncan said yesterday that the Board of Regents will interview Aiken and another finalist this morning in Dallas before making its final decision sometime during the early afternoon. Aiken, who has been the University's provost since 1987 and is a former dean of the School of Arts and Sciences, declined to comment yesterday. If he is offered the UT post, Aiken could become the second top University administrator to step down in recent months. Former Executive Vice President Marna Whittington, the University's chief financial officer, resigned in September to work for a private investment management firm. Even if the board passes Aiken over, there may still be a University connection to the UT helm. One of the other finalists, UT Law School Dean Mark Yudof, received degrees from the University in 1965 and in 1968. Monty Jones, director of news and public information for the UT system, said yesterday that no date has been set for the new president to start, adding that it would depend on how soon that person "could or would leave." But he predicted that the new president would take office either in January or in June, to avoid leaving a current position in the middle of a semester. Earlier this semester, Aiken visited Austin for an interview with the search committee and has since returned for a two-day campus visit to meet with UT administrators, faculty and students, Duncan said. Today's interview, which Duncan said should last about an hour and a half, marks the first chance for the full board to meet with Aiken. The board met with the other three candidates yesterday and Wednesday. The original pool of six finalists, announced late last month, narrowed this week when Henry Yang, dean of the School of Engineering at Purdue University, withdrew his name from consideration, Duncan said. The other finalists include Robert Berdahl, vice chancellor for academic affairs at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; Laurel Wilkening, provost at the University of Washington; and Luther Williams, assistant director for human resources at the National Science Foundation.
The University Board of Trustees arrives on campus today for its annual two-day October meetings. Agenda items for committee meetings range from an update on recent developments in the Mayor's Scholarship dispute to an overview by Provost Michael Aiken of undergraduate education at the University over the past 20 years. At today's Student Life Committee meeting, Trustees will hear a report on this year's Penn Reading Project and an explanation of recent changes to Escort Service. The meeting will be in the Gates Room of Van Pelt Library from 9:45 a.m. to 11:15 a.m. The Academic Policy Committee, meeting at the same time in Van Pelt's Woody Room, will hear presentations by the deans of the University's four undergraduate schools in addition to Aiken's overview. The University Responsibility Committee, also meeting at 9:45 a.m., will discuss changes the University has made to improve conditions for disabled students. That meeting will be held in the Club Room in the Faculty Club. Later this afternoon, from 3:15 p.m. to 4:45 p.m., the External Affairs and Internationalization committees will meet at the Faculty Club. On the agenda for External Affairs is an update on recent developments in the ongoing Mayor's Scholarship dispute, and a presentation of new admissions brochures the University began using this year. That meeting will be held in the Club Room. The Internationalization Committee, which was formed in June, will discuss recent changes in the University's development procedures in undergraduate education and public relations, as they relate to international students. The meeting will be held in the Tea Room. At its meeting tomorrow, the Budget and Finance Committee will discuss the status of the University's ongoing bid for state funding. The meeting will be held at 10:15 a.m. in the Tea Room. The stated meeting will take place tomorrow from 2:15 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. in the Hoover Lounge of Vance Hall. All meetings tomorrow and Friday are open to anyone from the University. (CUT LINE) Please see TRUSTEES, page 5 TRUSTEES, from page 1
It used to be that a PENNcard was a student's passport to any campus dormitory any time of day or night. Not anymore. Under a new policy designed "to provide an extra measure of security," only residents have access to their dorms during early morning hours, Residential Living Director Gigi Simeone said last week. The restrictions, which Residential Living implemented at the start of the school year, are in effect weekdays from 1 a.m. to 7 a.m., and from 2 a.m. to 7 a.m. on Friday and Saturday, Simeone said. During those hours, card readers at each dorm are programmed to reject PENNcards of non-residents. As a result, those students must be signed in by the resident they are visiting before being allowed in. Prior to the change, the outer door of each High Rise was locked after a certain time each night. But Simeone said that once non-residents got inside -- often by waiting for a resident to unlock it -- they had "open access" to the building. Simeone said a number of students had told Residential Living that they did not feel comfortable with non-residents in their dorms "at all hours of the night," and others complained about early morning noise possibly caused by non-residents. She acknowledged that the new policy may be inconvenient for residents, who now must sign in after-hours guests, but said that "we thought the advantages outweighed the inconveniences." "Our assumption is also that the hours we've chosen are sufficiently late at night that it's not something that would provide a huge inconvenience to students," she added. College sophomore Bobbie Guerra, who lives in the Quadrangle, said last week that she likes the restricted access and added that her friends are "pretty much for it." "Last year I remember hearing that people got into the residences and caused some problems," Guerra said. "We wouldn't have those problems if [non-residents] weren't allowed in." But some students said the restricted access was not worth the annoyance it causes, especially for residents of the Quad or the High Rises, who often live a long walk or elevator ride from the main desk. "It's a bother to go down and sign [friends] in," said College junior Kristin Berry, who lives in High Rise South. "If you pay $22,000 and have an ID, you should be able to go anywhere you want." Tim Monaco, head resident of High Rise East, said he favors the new policy because non-residents who might be "potential problems" are kept out and, as a result, the dorm's residents feel safer and "more unified." But Monaco added that he has heard little feedback from students, either for or against the restricted access. (CUT LINE) Please see DORMS, page 5 DORMS, from page 1
What do Medical School faculty, security staff and Book Store employees have in common? At the moment, probably not much. But starting next month, all three groups may be represented on a new list of judicial advisors available to help students who are going through the University's judicial process. Larry Moneta, associate vice provost for University life, said yesterday that 16 or 17 faculty and staff members representing a "broad cross-section" of the University have volunteered to become judicial advisors. The new list of advisors is required under the University's new judicial charter and code of academic integrity. In the past, students had to find a judicial advisor on their own. Moneta said that although some students used to ask the Judicial Inquiry Officer for the names of advisors, the list will make it easier for students to find representation because everyone on the list is willing to participate. Judicial advisors offer guidance to students who have been charged with violating a University guideline. They help them at any or all stages of the judicial process, including the investigation, settlement and hearing. Their purpose is to help students understand the disciplinary procedure and to provide support. Moneta said he believes the number of interested faculty and staff should yield "an adequate number" of judicial advisors, but he added that "if the demand is greater, I'll just go get more people." Moneta said his recruitment effort, consisting mostly of placing notices in Almanac, has gone "extremely well." "It was relatively easy," he said. "I didn't do any overt phone calling or wrist bending." In about two weeks, new advisors -- as well as new members of hearing panels -- will undergo a short orientation and training process to familiarize them with the judicial system and the rights of both complainants and respondents. After that, they will be available to students. "As far as I'm concerned, the day they've completed the training, they're on the list," Moneta said. Interim JIO Catherine Schifter, who moved into her Bennett Hall office a week ago, said yesterday that students involved in the judicial process will be referred either to the Judicial Administrator or the Vice Provost for University Life for access to the list of advisors.
and STEPHANIE DESMON Provost Michael Aiken is one of six finalists for the presidency of the University of Texas at Austin, officials said yesterday. James Duncan, executive vice chancellor for academic affairs for the University of Texas system and search committee chairperson, said Aiken appears on the school's short list for a number of reasons including his experience in both public and private education. "[Aiken is] an outstanding, experienced and competitive candidate," said Duncan, adding that the provost has a combination of "strong academic credentials" and a "good administrative base." Aiken visited Austin for an interview within the last few weeks and is expected to return for both a campus visit and an interview with the University of Texas Board of Regents, according to Duncan. Duncan added the Board of Regents plans to name a president in early November. Aiken, who has been the University's provost since 1987 and is a former School of Arts and Sciences dean, declined to comment yesterday. President Sheldon Hackney said he takes Texas' choice of Aiken as a "compliment" and said it validates an administrative philosophy he has always had. "I like to get the very best people I can in the key positions and when one does that, one is always vulnerable to other people discovering them and offering them the next job in their careers," Hackney said. Hackney added that Aiken would be qualified for the position. "[Aiken] understands universities," Hackney said. "He loves them, understands the faculty culture extremely well, respects the academic process and has very high standards." But he added that although he would be happy for Aiken should he become Texas' next president, "if he [Aiken] doesn't get chosen I'll also be delighted." The finalists, who were chosen from among 183 nominees and applicants, also include Robert Berdahl, vice chancellor for academic affairs at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; Laurel Wilkening, provost at the University of Washington; Luther Williams, assistant director for human resources at the National Science Foundation; Henry Yang, dean of the School of Engineering at Purdue University; and Mark Yudof, dean of Texas' School of Law.
Wharton students are used to hearing -- and trying to combat -- the stereotype of the Wharton student's single-minded, no-holds-barred obsession with making money. A 1988 Wharton graduate's guilty plea on Tuesday to federal charges of insider trading will do nothing to diminish those views, which the likes of Michael Milken and Donald Trump have helped to create. Darrin Gleeman, who graduated in 1988 with a degree in finance, pleaded guilty Tuesday to federal charges that he and a boyhood friend traded on inside information. He faces up to 10 years in prison and $500,000 in fines. "I think he's just another person giving the Wharton School a bad name," Wharton junior Karyn Smith said last night. "You're hearing that Wharton has all these back-stabbing, money-hungry people you can't trust, and he's one of those people." But one Wharton student, freshman Jack Friend, said last night that although insider trading is wrong, it could have been worse. "I think most people are going to forget about the whole thing," he said. "It's not like two Wharton guys went out and murdered 20 people. All they did was some fraud." Several students and one professor said last night that some people might conclude, unfairly, that Gleeman's case is a reflection of what students learn at Wharton. But they added that they did not think the case would diminish Wharton's excellent reputation among employers in corporate America. Wharton senior Stacy Wrubel said the case "obviously reflects poorly on Wharton," but added that "maybe it's just the Wharton name that happens to pop up because it's one of the nation's top business schools." "I certainly hope [Gleeman is] an aberration," Finance Professor Jack Guttentag said. "We graduate a lot of students and I guess you have to figure that a few of them are going to lose their way." "I don't think there's anything in the Wharton experience that leads people to cross the line, but of course Wharton students have the opportunity to do that because they take those kinds of [corporate] positions often times," he added. On Tuesday, Wharton Vice Dean Janice Bellace was quick to point out that under the school's revised undergradauate curriculum, students have to take two courses in "societal environment," one of which may be a course on ethics. Several students said last night they think that by requiring such courses, Wharton is doing all it can to ensure that students act ethically and lawfully once they enter the business world. U.S. Attorney Otto Obermaier said Tuesday that Gleeman, 26, began his scheme by studying newspaper articles and library materials in 1989 about unsuccessful insider trading schemes. He said Gleeman later convinced his friend, Harvard University graduate Christopher Garvey, to get a job at a New York law firm so that he could learn information that would help the two men profit from stock transactions. Obermaier announced the charges last week, saying the men made more than $340,000 in at least 15 deals. The prosecutor said Gleeman also recruited his father, Seymour, 59, to assist in the scam because he was someone "who could inconspicuously travel abroad to open foreign trading accounts." The elder Seymour faces criminal charges, including securities fraud.
and STEPHANIE DESMON University Trustees took a look at the University's new admissions brochures during a visit to campus yesterday and said they approved of the plainer, more student-centered publications. "Slick is out," Trustee Gordon Bodek told the External Affairs Committee. "Recycled paper is in." "There are one or two things I might change," Trustee Elsie Howard said during the meeting. "But I think as a general new look, [the brochures] look wonderful." The brochures, which began circulating to prospective students this fall, were created after a series of interviews with focus groups of students throughout the country and at the University. Ann Duffield, head of the University Design Group, said she has a pile of glossy brochures from hundreds of universities -- including the Ivy League schools -- that all look the same. "It would be almost impossible for you to pull out Penn's [old brochure] from that pile," Duffield told the Trustees. "[The new brochure] stands out from a group of publications because it's not slick, it's not polished." One feature of the new brochures is a series of conversations between students on subjects ranging from why Philadelphians put cheese whiz on their fries to why University students refer to President Sheldon Hackney as "Sheldon." Duffield said switching to the unconventional brochures involved "some risks," but she added that the response from prospective students so far has been positive. At the meeting, the committee also heard an update on the Mayor's Scholarship dispute from Acting Executive Vice President John Gould, who devoted most of his briefing to the University's strained relations with the community. Gould said the University is now "more deeply engaged" in the community than at any time in the past decade, but he said that the relationship is also the "worst it's been" in that period. "What's missing is communication," he told the committee. Carol Farnsworth, assistant vice president for University relations, said that the University is trying to increase awareness of the University's community involvement by visiting the editorial boards of area newspapers, placing advertisements and increasing "personal contact" with area civic groups. She said that University admissions officials are publicizing the Mayor's Scholarship program with visits to 53 Philadelphia high schools this fall -- a 56 percent increase over last year -- including 32 public high schools. The meeting was one of five Trustee meetings held today. The Trustees are on campus today and yesterday for their annual October meeting. At the Student Life Committee meeting earlier in the day, Trustees discussed the Freshman Reading Project and changes to Escort Service. Associate Dean of the College Norman Adler said that attendance at the this year's reading project seminars dropped drastically from last year, but added that he felt the program should be continued. Gloria Chisum, vice chairperson of the Board of Trustees, supported the program, saying, "Sometimes it takes a little time to get a new program off the ground -- press on." Steven Murray, associate vice president of business services, and University Police Commissioner John Kuprevich discussed the effectiveness of the changes to Escort. Murray said that the changes have addressed the needs of the University by cutting down response time and increasing access for off-campus students. He added that the new system is still being tested and that it may need changes in the future. The Trustee's University Responsibility Committee met to discuss the University's obligations to disabled students and faculty. Vice President of Facilities Management Arthur Gravina explained the steps the University is taking to comply with handicap-access laws in all of its renovations and new construction. And administrators from the Office of Affirmative Action outlined their role in providing services to disabled students, faculty and staff. Joann Mitchell, director of the Office of Affirmative Action, said the University is required by law to meet the special requests of disabled students and employees as long as the requests are not too burdensome. "I think we will, in fact, see an increase in the number of students and faculty with disabilities," Alice Nagle, the coordinator of Programs for People with Disabilities, told the Trustees. The Academic Policy and Internationalization committees also met yesterday. The Budget and Finance Committee and the stated meeting of the full Board will meet today. Staff writers Stephen Glass, Lucy Oh, Dwayne Sye and Cara Tanamachi contributed to this story.
A 1988 graduate of the Wharton School pleaded guilty Tuesday to federal charges that he and a boyhood friend traded on inside information after examining failed Wall Street deals of the 1980s. Darrin Gleeman, 26, of New York, pleaded guilty before U.S. District Judge Lawrence M. McKenna to conspiracy to commit securities fraud and to wire fraud. And Christopher Garvey, 26, of Sacramento, Calif., Gleeman's childhood friend and a graduate of Harvard University, pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit securities fraud. Gleeman faces up to 10 years in prison and more than $500,000 in fines. Garvey faces a maximum five years in prison and more than $250,000 in fines. U.S. Attorney Otto G. Obermaier announced the charges last week, saying that the men made more than $340,000 in at least 15 deals. He said Gleeman started his scheme by studying newspaper articles and library materials in 1989 about unsuccessful insider trading schemes. The prosecutor said Gleeman later convinced Garvey to get a job at the New York law firm of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher and Flom so that he could learn information that would help the two men profit from stock transactions. Gleeman later allegedly recruited his father, Seymour, 59, to assist in the scam. The elder Gleeman still faces various criminal charges, including securities fraud. Gleeman sought the help of his father, then a senior marketing representative with International Business Machines Inc., because he needed someone ''who could inconspicuously travel abroad to open foreign trading accounts,'' court papers said. Wharton Vice Dean Janice Bellace said last night that she was "disturbed" by news of the guilty pleas. "We are always very distressed to discover that some of our graduates obviously did not get the school's message that although we want our students to be competitive, we also want them to be ethical," Bellace said. She noted that Wharton's revised undergraduate curriculum requires students to take two courses in "societal environment," one of which may be on ethics. Bellace said she found the news "especially disturbing" because many Wharton graduates who work on Wall Street are "acting lawfully and ethically." "I do worry about it giving Wharton a bad name because they're not typical of our graduates, they're aberrant," she said. "But that's what you see on the front pages of the newspapers." Finance Professor Morris Mendolson said last night that Gleeman's behavior is not a reflection of what Wharton students are taught. But he said some people will inevitably associate the school with the insider trading allegations in this case. Mendolson added, however, that the apparent involvement of Gleeman's father in the scam suggests that Gleeman was more influenced by what he learned at home than at Wharton. "You know the old business about family values," he said. "If his father's involved, that says someting about that family's values." Gleeman is not the only Wharton graduate to have been involved in financial corruption on Wall Street. Michael Milken, who received an MBA from Wharton in 1979, pleaded guilty in 1990 to breaking federal securities and tax laws. Milken was sentenced to 10 years in prison, but his sentence has since been reduced. Attorneys for Gleeman and Garvey said the plea was part of a deal in which their cooperation in the continuing investigation would be taken into account at sentencing. A date was not announced. The Associated Press contributed to this story.