Search Results
Below are your search results. You can also try a Basic Search.
(01/15/92 10:00am)
There is good news and there is bad news. The good news is, statewide tax collections, which may decide whether the University regains access to $200,000 in frozen state allocations, are currently on schedule. But unfortunately, the Pennsylvania Governor's office said yesterday that the money, which the state retained as a reserve, may still be used by the state to compensate for a drafting error in this year's tax law and shortfalls in the lottery fund. If the University loses the promised money, administrators may have to rework this year's budget, which was designed around receiving the full $37.6 million. In November, Gov. Robert Casey froze $130 million of state funds, including the $200,000 which was earmarked for the University's equipment budget. This money would be used to purchase any University equipment, including classroom supplies and research materials. The funds were stalled pending a report detailing how much money was collected in taxes. But even though tax collections are doing well, a $73 million error in the state's budget -- omitting a business tax on utility companies -- and insufficient money for Pennsylvania's lottery system, may force lawmakers to keep the frozen funds, said Sue Grimm, a spokesperson for Casey. Grimm also said that "critical times" for tax collection including Christmas sales have not yet been counted but said the ongoing national recession may keep tax returns down. "Tax collections so far are right on target," Grimm said. "But our national economic forecasts don't look too good." Executive Vice President Marna Whittington said last night that the University may prepare alternatives in case the funds are not released. "We will have to make contingency plans," Whittington said. "If the economy does not recover, you may see more [funding freezes] in the future." Besides the lottery and the budget error, the frozen money may be used supplement insufficient medical entitlements. "Our revenue is based on our tax package," Grimm said. "If money is needed, it is a definite possibility we will use those reserved dollars."
(01/15/92 10:00am)
The Morris Arboretum has lost more than half its state appropriation to make up for state money lost by decreasing certain taxes. The Arboretum, which is managed by the University, will only receive $150,000 this year -- $250,000 shy of the original allotment and one-eighth of the Aboretum's $2 million annual budget. "I would consider [the cuts] critical," Aboretum director Paul Meyer said last night. "I hope it's not fait accompli." Meyer added while the lost money would cause the Arboretum to cut programming, it would still be able to operate. But Meyer added the cuts would drastically reduce the quality of the Arboretum, which is considered one of the best in the nation. Meyer said the Arboretum may lobby in Harrisburg to have the funding restored. But Executive Vice President Marna Whittington acknowledged last night that the University may have to find ways to cope without the money. "We have already built our budget around it [the state funding] and it's late in the year," Whittington said. "We'll have to figure out how to work it." The Arboretum is one of ten groups to lose state funding after Governor Robert Casey signed a bill exempting banks from a tax on computer services such as wire transfers. Last month, Casey requested legislation to repeal sales tax on services he said placed unintended burdens on individuals and firms in Pennsylvania. But the legislation he signed contained the series of banking exemptions, which were added by the Senate. While Casey opposed the amendments, he could not veto them without vetoing the entire legislation. The amendment created a $3.6 million shortfall in the state budget. Sue Grimm, a spokesperson for the governor, defended the legislation even though ten organizations lost state money. "They were annoying taxes and they were never intended [by the governor]," Grimm said. Grimm added that Casey will veto any further tax repeals since they are irresponsible and would otherwise force the state into a deficit. The state's current financial atmosphere is cautious because the state wants to ensure its budget is balanced at the end of the year -- a requirement under the state constitution.
(12/09/91 10:00am)
The University has placed the Acacia fraternity under two years probation and alcohol prohibition after finding it collectively responsible for sexual harassment, the complaintant in the case said yesterday. College junior Judy Schlossberg filed a complaint with the Judicial Inquiry Office in April charging fraternity members with stealing and distributing a nude photograph of herself that had been stored in her boyfriend's room. In November, Acacia was found to be collectively responsible for sexual harassment. Schlossberg said yesterday the fraternity had agreed to accept the sanctions. Acacia will be prohibited from having alcohol at any of its parties for the next two years and will have to undergo a membership review by an alumni advisory board, she added. The fraternity's members will also participate in "educational programming." Acacia President Brian Baxt did not return phone calls placed at his home last night. Tricia Phaup, director of Office of Fraternity and Sorority Affairs, did not return phone messages placed this week at her office. But Schlossberg said she was "upset" that the charges were not more stringent. "Most of the [educational programming] they take part in whether or not they have been sanctioned," Schlossberg said. "They have taken part in them in the past -- a lot of good they seeem to have done." She said the programming would probably include sensitivity workshops and Students Together Against Acquaintance Rape programs. Last week Schlossberg said four individuals were also charged, including then-President Baxt and its former rush officer. Schlossberg identified Baxt, former Rush Officer Maamoun Rajeh and brothers Mark Olivero and Chris Wilkes as the four individuals who have accepted the JIO's findings that they sexually harassed Schlossberg. Baxt, Rajeh and Olivero also accepted JIO findings of theft, trespassing, and acts of retaliation, Schlossberg said. Schlossberg said Baxt, Rajeh, and Olivero will be fined, will have to undergo psychiatric evaluation, attend an "educational program," and be put under suspended suspension -- under which they will be immediately suspended if they fail to comply with their settlement.
(12/09/91 10:00am)
The Mask and Wig Club copied the same nude photograph that launched a sexual harassment investigation against the Acacia fraternity in the program for its annual parody afternoon last March. The photograph was displayed as a classified personal advertisement, according to Engineering senior Craig Martin, who said he saw the program after the parody afternoon from a friend. "It said something like a single, Jewish female in search of mate -- short, dumpy, Jewish, male -- interest in porn films is a must," Martin said this weekend. Martin said he was the roommate of the complainant's boyfriend and added that he never kept a copy of the program and only saw someone else's. Mask and Wig Chairperson Alfred Bingham and Acacia President Brian Baxt did not return several telephone messages left at their houses yesterday. College junior Judy Schlossberg, who filed the complaint and has publicly discussed the Acacia case, said last night that she did not publicize Mask and Wig's involvement since they were not investigated, charged or sanctioned by the Judicial Inquiry Office. "The Judicial Inquiry Office was made fully aware on April 26 of everyone's involvement," Schlossberg said. "I told her of Acacia and Mask and Wig to the fullest extent that I knew." Schlossberg added that a major factor in the JIO's decision on collective responsibility hinged on the group's behavior following the incident. "While Acacia was voting to ban me, Mask and Wig had everybody calling me," Schlossberg also said. "[Mask and Wig] did not want to keep me from the JIO. Supporting me was their first concern. The second concern was the club's well being." Schlossberg said she and her boyfriend first found out that the photograph had been stolen when the program was distributed and that prior to that she had just heard rumors. "I did not think [Mask and Wig's actions] were in anyway appropriate. They were most certainly damaging. The only mitigating thing was their actions folowing the incident," Schlossberg said. Acacia has been found collectively responsible for a complex incident regarding the photograph, which was highlighted in a pledge skit. Four Acacia brothers, including the then-president and rush officer, were individually charged in connection with the incident.
(12/05/91 10:00am)
Hundreds of graduate teaching assistants at Yale University staged a one-day strike yesterday which led to the cancellation of dozens of classes. The Graduate Employee and Student Organization, a group representing about half of Yale's approximately 2,200 resident graduate students, is seeking larger stipends for teaching assistants, lower health care payments, and a system of grievance procedures similar to the one used by full-time employees. The students are also seeking to unionize. City police estimated the crowd peaked around 2,500, when the strikers and supporters formed a picket line two blocks long. The campus is in the heart of the city and, for part of the day, police closed off two lanes of a main downtown street to accommodate the protesters. The graduate students were joined by members of two Yale unions that represent maintenance personnel, custodians, clerical and food service workers and forced some dining halls on campus to close. Michael Goldstein, Graduate and Professional Student Assembly chairperson, said last night that the University may also see movement towards unionization. "It is not because people are in love with unions. They want to be treated respectfully and fairly," Goldstein said. "The lack of health care benefits will be the driving force behind unionization." Gordon Lafer, a fourth-year political science student who serves as a spokesman for GESO, said that one of the major thrusts behind the movement at Yale has also been health insurance. "I know that there are university unionization drives underway at other schools," Lafer said last night. "We encourage other places to do it." Picket lines went up this morning at about a dozen locations around the Yale campus, including the Hall of Graduate Studies, where about 200 demonstrators marched. Graduate students and members of the two unions chanted "Two-four-six-eight, Yale is a cheapskate" and "Beep, Beep, Yale's Cheap." The administration has repeatedly said that it will not recognize the union because it views graduate students as scholars-in-training rather than as employees. "I'm curious to know whether the faculty are scholars since they certainly consider them employees," Goldstein said. "I assume they're not scholars which would explain why the president of Yale is cutting so many programs." Lafer said about 70 classes had been canceled or moved off-campus. But Yale spokesperson Martha Matzke said yesterday that it was still "mainly business as usual." Lafer added that if Yale is successful they will be the first private institution to unionize the graduate students. GESO is unique since they are calling for unionization of all graduate students, even those who are not employed by Yale. "Even graduate students who are not employees have policies made collectively so we all need to bargain collectively," Lafer said. "We are doing something innovative." Deborah Chernoff, a spokesperson for Yale's Federation for University Employees, said yesterday that Local unions 34 and 35 joined the students to support their right to become another chapter of their union and to remind the university that their contracts expire in January. The Yale administration told union members they would have their pay docked if they joined the strike. But because the protest was peaceful, Matzke said the university did not intend on taking more severe action, such as firing workers engaged in what Yale said was an illegal work stoppage. Jesse Jackson spoke at a rally in support of the strikers at New Haven Coliseum, where about 2,000 people gathered in the afternoon. "Yale must be creative and not punitive to be a great university," Jackson told the crowd. The Associated Press contributed to this story.
(12/05/91 10:00am)
The student who filed a sexual harassment complaint against Acacia fraternity with the JIO said yesterday that four Acacia members, including the house's former president and rush chairperson, have accepted the sexual harassment findings leveled against them. Baxt, Rajeh and Olivero also accepted Judicial Inquiry Office findings of theft, trespassing and acts of retaliation, Schlossberg said last night. Interim JIO Jane Combrinck-Graham said yesterday that she could not confirm or deny if the Acacia members had accepted the charges. Baxt did not return several phone messages last night, Rajeh and Wilkes declined to comment, and the phone number listed for Olivero has been disconnected. Schlossberg said Baxt, Rajeh and Olivero will all be fined, will have to undergo a psychiatric evaluation, attend an "educational program," and will be put under suspended suspension -- under which they will be immediately suspended if they fail to comply with their settlement. The three are not required to abide by the psychiatrist's recommendations, she added. Schlossberg said last night that she felt the University did not impose strict enough punishments for the alleged incident. "Initially the JIO told me that she was going to put an unconditional notation on both Baxt's and Rajeh's transcript," Schlossberg said. "I later learned that Baxt did not receive a notation and I am unclear if Rajeh has a notation." Schlossberg said College senior Baxt originally found a nude photograph of her two summers ago in her boyfriend's room. Her boyfriend was a brother of the fraternity and has since been granted early alumni status. Baxt showed the nude photograph that summer to one other person and discussed it with that person frequently, she added. In December 1990, Baxt re-entered the room, took the photograph, and showed it to seven other brothers who were also in the apartment, Schlossberg said. The photograph was subsequently returned to its place in the boyfriend's room. Wharton senior Olivero saw the photograph at this time and within 24 hours he and Wharton senior Rajeh went to the apartment, took the photo, made an unknown number of copies of it and then returned it to the room, Schlossberg added. "They later admitted to me that they had xeroxed the photo with the initial intent to post it in the house," Schlossberg said. "They also were thinking of using the photo to award to my boyfriend 'Bad Brother of the Week'." Schlossberg said Acacia gave this designation as a prize at each of its weekly chapter meetings to recognize a sexual action. "Each week at meeting they would give a small gift to a brother who had done something 'naughty' with a women," she said. "Either sex or something elicitly exciting with a member of the opposite sex." Her boyfriend, who asked that his name not be released, confirmed that these awards occurred. Rajeh and Olivero, according to the complainant, decided against using the photo for the award or posting it, but kept the photocopies. Second semester last year, Rajeh showed the photocopy to then-plege Wilkes and later instructed the spring semester pledge class how to act out the position that Schlossberg assumed in the photo, she said. The position was then mimicked at pledge skit night where a spring pledge class member assumed the position and said, "Look familiar?" to her boyfriend. The pledge who performed the position was not charged. Schlossberg also said that Wilkes was "further involved in spreading the incident outside of the fraternity," but would not elaborate. During the skit night the pledges were partially naked, but Schlossberg added that they said they were not unclothed to mimick her, but rather because brothers had thrown eggs and beer at them. "The pledge skit was sexual harassment as well violation of the anti-hazing code," Schlossberg said. "Hazing makes it collective." Last month the JIO and Office for Fraternity and Sorority Affairs said that Acacia was found collectively responsible for the incident. Collective responsibility, according to Combrinck-Graham, can carry sanctions ranging from probation to revocation of charter. Schlossberg said last night that both removal and suspension of the fraternity were not being considered as punishments. Through a complicated process last spring, Olviero and Rajeh were expelled by the fraternity, but this fall the fraternity voted to offer the two reinstatement, she added. Schlossberg said that Baxt and Rajeh had been charged and sanctioned for displaying "disrespectful behavior" towards women in the past. "The fact that this has now happened twice with these individuals shows a clear pattern of harassment," Schlossberg said. "This should have been taken into account during the sanctioning process, but it clearly wasn't for they were neither expelled nor suspended."
(12/04/91 10:00am)
Robert Viktora probably did not think academia would be interested in his burning a cross on the front lawn of a black family last June. But one year later, the American Civil Liberties Union has trumpeted Viktora's case, bringing it to the U.S. Supreme Court today as a test to the constitutionality of hate-crime legislation. Many experts say RAV v. St. Paul will shape the way universities draft their own harassment codes, although most agree that it would not be legally binding at private institutions such as the University. "This will totally disrupt the effort on campuses to control hate-crime," said Mark Anfinson, one of a host of Viktora's attorneys. "If the Supreme Court says the St. Paul ordinance is unconstitutional it will knock [universities' harassment policies] out an eighth story window." But Anfinson added that he does not think there would be any effect on private universities no matter how the Supreme Court rules. Finance Professor Morris Mendelson said yesterday that he is disgruntled by the current code and, although he does not know how the Supreme Court will rule, he hopes the University takes the decision to heart. "I think it is disgraceful the University should [fray] the edges of the First Amendment," Mendelson said yesterday. "It is better to err on the side of academic freedom than loss of free speech." Unlike many other cases, it is unclear how the Supreme Court will rule on the hate-crime case since, according to Anfinson, traditional liberals are "badly splintered" on the issue. He said, for example, the former Supreme Court Justices William Brennan and Thurgood Marshall were staunch supporters of the First Amendment, but also wanted to protect minorities. Assistant to the President Steven Steinberg, who has been President Hackney's chief aide in formulating the University's new policy, said yesterday the new policy was designed to meet two goals -- maintaining free speech and allowing everyone to speak. "We have been grappling with this issue for two years and the new racial harassment policy is the result of that effort to deal with these concerns," Steinberg said. The University's new code is similar to the code at the University of Wisconsin, which was struck down as unconstitutional by a federal court last month. Like the Wisconsin policy, the University's code requires that racist behavior be directed towards an identifiable group, that it be intentionally harmful, and that it insult or demean the race, ethnicity or national origin of a person or group. ACLU spokesperson Lynn Decker said yesterday that her organization believes that the St. Paul hate-crime ordinance -- which is being used to prosecute Viktora -- is vague and hopes the Supreme Court will require it to be redrafted and put forth a constitutional test for future codes across the country. The ordinance states "whoever places on public or private property a symbol, object, appellation, characterization or graffiti, including but not limited to a burning cross or Nazi swastika, which one knows or has reasonable grounds to know arouses anger, alarm or resentment in others on the basis of race, color, religion or gender, commits disorderly conduct and shall be guilty of a misdemeanor." Decker said that many forms of speech that are perfectly acceptable would be illegal under this law, including displaying a swastika in one's home. But Minnesota Civil Liberties Union legal counsel Sarah Gilman said earlier this semester that she hoped the weight of the Supreme Court will influence private universities to rethink their policies. And there is precedent for the University to reconsider its code when a court ruling had been handed down. The current revisions in the University's code were largely spurred by a Michigan federal court ruling two years ago, which stated that the University of Michigan's harassment policy -- which was then almost identical to the University's former code -- was unconstitutional. "Michigan's policy was narrower and had a more limited scope than the St. Paul ordinance," Anfinson said. "But, they are of the same genus."
(12/03/91 10:00am)
The Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia filed a revised version of its suit against the University over Mayor's Scholarships last week, making several technical changes. "[The changes] were to meet the technical requirements [the University] had objected to," PILCOP attorney Michael Churchill said last night. "None of the substance has been changed." The University filed preliminary objections to PILCOP's suit last month. But not all of the objected points were changed in the amended complaint. The amended suit alleges the University was found in violation of the antitrust laws. But the University was never found to be in violation of antitrust laws concerning need-based financial aid even though the Justice Department investigated possible violations. The suit is "more in line" with proper form for a class action suit, PILCOP attorney Tom Gilhool said last night. The suit now contains the names of trustees of the labor organizations that have joined the suit and has added five new individuals and the Philadelphia Fire Fighters Union. Engineering senior Maurice Enoch was dropped as a plaintiff in the suit, but Churchill declined to comment on why he is no longer suing the University. Enoch did not return phone calls placed at his home last night. University senior Kellie Robinson said last night that she joined the lawsuit because the Mayor's Scholarship program is "an obscene and ridiculous lie." She said that when she first came to the University she was promised that "it would be alright," but that now she is burdened with loans that will amount to, according to the complaint, $300 a month for the next ten years. "I just took them on their word that I would be okay," Robinson said. "I thought it was a great idea, a philanthropy thing. It's not. It's a sham." PILCOP filed suit against the University in October alleging the University does not provide enough Mayor's Scholarships to needy Philadelphia high schoolers.
(11/25/91 10:00am)
President Sheldon Hackney and other administrators told several state legislators and City Council members the University's position on the Mayor's Scholarship lawsuit in a private meeting Friday, participants said yesterday. "Basically we just talked about the issue of the lawsuit and the University's position," State Representative Jim Roebuck (D-Phila.) said. John Gould, executive director of the President's Office, said last night that he felt the meeting was a good beginning to set the record straight on what the University has done for the community. "Bad allegations travel faster than good news," Gould said. "Our meeting on Friday was the beginning of sitting down with people and saying this is what we've done, here is the record." Gould added that the lawmakers had seen the complaint and heard the plaintiff's side of the story, adding that Hackney wanted to meet with them to explain the University's side. "I think we made a good beginning," he said. "There is a good amount of misinformation out there and we were pleased with the way the meeting went." PILCOP, the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia, filed suit in Common Pleas Court last month charging that the administration has not complied with a 1977 city ordinance which requires the University to provide scholarships to needy Philadelphia high school students. PILCOP has alleged that the University is required to give out 125 new four-year scholarships annually, for a total of 500 at any given time. The University believes they should provide 125 scholarships total at any one time. Roebuck said that the major focus of the meeting was to explain the University's position on the controversial lawsuit, but after the meeting he said he believes the PILCOP is correct. He added that he is interested in discussing the lawsuit further with the University. "From what I can see, the University is obligated to provide 125 scholarships a year to needy Philadelphians -- for a total of 500," Roebuck added last night. "That would seem to be what the resolution states." State Representative Vincent Hughes (D-Phila.) said last night that he could not attend the meeting as scheduled due to an emergency, but that his initial belief is that if PILCOP's allegations are correct the University will have to "work hard to fix this problem." "If PILCOP's assertions are the way they laid it out, the University is going to have a lot to do," Hughes said. "The University is going to have . . . to correct their failure to implement the program correctly." Hughes said he hoped to receive a full report of the meeting from other lawmakers today. Neither University administrators or local lawmakers would say which goverment officials attended the meeting. The University began the scholarship program to comply with a series of agreements with the city that date back to the 19th century.
(11/22/91 10:00am)
President Sheldon Hackney is scheduled to meet privately with City Council representatives and state legislators today to discuss the controversy surrounding the Mayor's Scholarship program. Hackney said last night that the he and the lawmakers will "discuss the whole range of issues" relating to the program, but declined to specify which lawmakers would be attending this afternoon's meeting. "It's rather straight forward -- PILCOP has been talking to [lawmakers] and giving their version, and we are simply seeking to set the record straight," Hackney said. PILCOP, the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia, filed suit in Common Pleas Court last month charging that the administration has not complied with a 1977 city ordinance which requires the University to provide scholarships to needy Philadelphia high school students. "We're there to answer their questions," Hackney added. "They have been given an erroneous view and misinformation." State Rep. James Roebuck (D-Phila.), who represents much of the area west of the University's campus, said last night that he had been invited to the meeting and planned to attend. Roebuck said that the meeting pertains to the Mayor's Scholarship program, but said he was not aware of the specific agenda. "I'm very interested, since it affects my district and my neighborhood," Roebuck said. "I suspect that we will get information about the scholarships." Hackney also said that lawmakers will be provided with "all the information they want" at the meeting. The University began the scholarship program to comply with a series of agreements with the city that date back to the 19th century. In exchange for the scholarships, the University received nearly 47 acres of land where the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania and the Quadrangle now stand. PILCOP has alleged that the University is required to give out 125 new four-year scholarships annually, for a total of 500 at any given time. The University believes they should provide 125 scholarships total at one time.
(11/20/91 10:00am)
University lawyers asked the Philadelphia Common Pleas Court to dismiss a local legal center's suit that alleges the University does not provide enough Mayor's Scholarships to needy city high schoolers. In documents filed Monday, the University's preliminary response states that the suit spearheaded by the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia contains numerous allegations that are both "impertinent" and "erroneous." The University refuted PILCOP's claim that some of the plaintiffs have been injured, and said that since no injuries occurred, the organizations do not have the right to sue the University. But PILCOP attorney Michael Churchill said last night that the University was making technical arguments that miss the substance of the suit. He said that the response does not address PILCOP's main contention that the University is not providing the correct number of scholarships as prescribed by a city ordinance. "These are all technical reasons, they only go to small pieces of the complaint," Churchill said. "All of these are technical matters that can be easily supplied or corrected." The University also states in its objections that PILCOP failed to identify any contracts which bind the University to the plaintiff organizations and associations, which include unions and University groups. The University further contends that the organizations and groups represent members who live outside of Philadelphia, while the Mayor's Scholarship program is explicitly for Philadelphia students. The objections also state that PILCOP's allegations that the University was violating antitrust laws are both unfounded and "immaterial to any of the issues." In their complaint, filed last month, PILCOP also referred to discussions between the University and other schools regarding need-based financial aid, which were investigated for antitrust violations. But the University was never found to be in violation of antitrust laws and settled with the Justice Department over the summer. "[Those discussions] affected the amount of scholarship money they could give," Churchill said. "That is relevant." The University also added that its nationwide recruiting efforts are not relevant to the suit, despite PILCOP's inclusion of them in the suit. The University also filed an answer Monday to PILCOP's petition to have the case assigned to a single judge. The University has asked the court not to rule yet on PILCOP's request for a single judge but instead provide both parties with the opportunity to discuss the issue. "I think we will come to the same point in the end, these are a bunch of lawyers nitpicking," Churchill said. "They are arguing which rock they will step on to get across the stream, but we will both get to the other side."
(11/18/91 10:00am)
Betty Bunn dreams of rags to riches. The resident of a city public housing pro - ject said she could not attend college be - cause she did not have enough money, but now wants her children to achieve the American & Dream. Bunn said her children have the gifts and talents to attend the University, but they need full scholarships. So Bunn and others like her have joined an effort spearheaded by the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia to force the University to quadruple the number of scholarships it awards to city students. PILCOP is charging the University with not follow - ing a 1977 city ordinance requiring it to sponsor 125 full, four-year scholarships each year. PILCOP claims that the University should award 125 new scholarships each year, for a total of 500. The University now says it gives out 162 partial scholarships -- the monetary equivalent of 125 full scholarships -- and is complying with the ordinance. PILCOP lawyer Thomas Gilhool maintains that the University is ducking its obligations to the city by not providing 500 scholarships. Gilhool also believes the University has not adequately publicized the program, leaving many poor students unaware of a program that could allow them to go to school. · The University's obligation to the city dates back to 1882 when the University agreed to establish and & maintain 50 scholarships in return for land near what is currently the Hospital of the University of & Pennsylvania. The number of scholarships was increased in June 1910, when a city ordinance required the University to establish and maintain an additional 75 in any & department. The scholarships were designated for deserving stu - dents who attended any high school in the city. In exchange, the University acquired additional land. On August 1, 1977, the University entered into a new agreement with the city that consolidated the two plans and removed deed restrictions that prevented the University from mortgaging the land. "The University shall agree to establish and forever maintain at least 125, four-year, full tuition scholar - ships, or their equivalent, in any of the departments of the University, to be awarded annually by the mayor of the City of Philadelphia to deserving students from all of the schools of the city," the agreement, which was passed as an ordinance, states. The University and PILCOP now disagree whether this requires the University to provide a total of 125 scholarships in any one year or 125 new four-year scholarships each year. "It is 125 four-year full tuition scholarships to be awarded annually," PILCOP's Gilhool said. "That & means there should be 500 Mayor's Scholars walking around campus in any given period, or their monetary equivalent." But University General Counsel Shelley Green said the University reads the ordinance based on history. She said the 1977 agreement was a merger of the previous two, which called for 50 and 75 scholarships to be awarded each year. Green said that the new agreement in 1977 was forged for clerical reasons -- not to increase the num - ber of scholarships from 125 to 500. One of the clerical reasons was that the University wanted to mortgage the land, and banks would not negotiate with land tied up in an ongoing agreement between the city and the University. The University and city created the new ordinance so the land could be mortgaged. A second reason behind the ordinance was the Uni - versity's desire to establish the scholarships under a system that would be strictly need-based. But PILCOP argues that the ordinance did increase the number of scholarships. Gilhool, who was once the state's Secretary of Edu - cation, cites the preamble of the 1977 ordinance which states, "the University has agreed to increase the annual value of the scholarships awarded pursuant to the ordinances approved January 24, 1882, and June 15, 1910." Gilhool said that the only way that one could in - crease the value of scholarships from the previous agreements would be to make them "four-year & annuals." "It's says to increase the annual value," Gilhool said. "There is no way to increase the value without making them four-year annuals -- they were already giving 125 one-year annuals." PILCOP and complainants in the class action suit claim the University's alleged failure to comply with the ordinance is forcing would-be students to matricu - late at other universities which they can better afford. "Being able to pay for schooling is the primary reason to apply," Black Student League President Jessica Dixon said. "Some students go to Drexel and Temple and did not apply [to the University] because they did not know [the scholarships] was available." Bunn, who joined the suit on behalf of her three children, agreed with Dixon. "I have a son who wants to be an artist and a daughter who wants to be a doctor and I could not afford for them to go to [the University]," Bunn said. "If this is taken lightly we will have children stranded in the street -- the University is not living up to its obligations at all." Another complainant, Erika Drummond, said that she did not apply to the University after she graduated summa cum laude last year from Girls High School, and instead enrolled at the University of Pittsburgh, where she received a "large financial aid package that was enticing." But Drummond added that she would not have come to the University even if she had known about the program. · The class action suit filed in the Philadelphia Com - mon Pleas Court last month charges the University with a host of violations, including taking away the mayor's rights by not allowing him to choose the recipients. "[The University] has taken over the awarding & whole cloth, allowing the mayor of the city the hollow, formalistic ratification of decisions made by the Uni - versity," the complaint says. The city is not a complainant in the case, and a spokesperson for Mayor Wilson Goode would only say that Goode was pleased with the program. The spokes - person declined to say whether the University was complying with the ordinance. "[Goode] is pleased with these scholarships," & spokesperson Karen Warrington said. "They make a critical difference in the lives of many children who may not be able to pursue higher education without them." President Sheldon Hackney said at October's Uni - versity Council meeting that he discussed the program with Goode this summer and both had concluded that the University was in compliance. PILCOP also charges the University with hiding the Mayor's Scholarship Program by failing to publicize it. Three University groups the BSL, the African & American Association of Faculty, Staff and Administra - tors, and the Asociacion Cultural de Estudiantes La - tino Americanos, joined PILCOP's suit. Dixon said that one of the main reasons the BSL joined the suit was that many Philadelphia high school - ers were not aware of the scholarship which could influence their decision to come to the University. She said many were not told by their high school, the city, or the University about the program. But Admissions Dean Willis Stetson said the Univer - sity has been working to increase public awareness of the Mayor's Scholarship program. "We have never turned our back on the Philadelphia area," Stetson said. "We are committed to visibility in Philadelphia." The complaint also alleged the University "has sys - tematically acted to reduce the number of students at the University from schools in Philadelphia." But Stetson said his office is "heavily recruiting" in Philadelphia and will travel to over 30 high schools throughout the city this year. "We have also sent an announcement of the Mayor's Scholarship this fall to all principals and high school guidance counselors in Philadelphia," Stetson said. "Plus, we have sent the letter to all the students in our contact file -- that's over 1700." Stetson added that the Admissions Office has re - ceived at least 30 early decision applications from Philadelphia high school seniors, up from 15 last year. PILCOP also alleges in its complaint that the Uni - versity has focused more attention on national recruit - ment, particularly in the "Sunbelt states." But Green said that greater geographical diversity was not exclusive to the University, rather a national trend in education. · Administrators have argued that the University is spending over $1.8 million to uphold the 1977 agree - ment with the city. But the administration's figures are vague and last year, the University only doled out an additional $81,000 over the amount the University would have given without the program. Director of Student Financial Aid William Schilling said scholarship recipients go through the University's normal financial aid process and then receive an extra $500. "We do the normal evaluation of need and then determine what the eligibility would be for a Mayor's Scholarship," Schilling said. "For all students who come to the University, we will provide financial aid to meet your need." In the last academic year there were 162 Mayor's Scholars enrolled at the University -- receiving the equivalent of 125 scholarships, according to University administrators. 162 scholars multiplied by $500 equals $81,000 additional dollars. "I am amazed. I am shocked and amazed. It's a scandal," Gilhool said. "Amid the pieties there is the scandalous truth -- all the piety about the University's poverty can not withstand this discovery."
(11/15/91 10:00am)
After five years of legal wrangling, a Common Pleas Court judge last week absolved the University of any responsibility for the death of a high school crew coach who had fallen over a dam while boating on the Schuylkill River in 1984. Judge Curtis Carson said in his findings of fact that "there is no evidence of a willful or malicious action by the University." Claims Supervisor Ron Jasner and Associate General Counsel Neil Hamburg said yesterday that although the incident was tragic, they were pleased with the decision since the University was not liable. Kippy Liddle, a Brooks School assistant rowing coach, was reviewing a spring pre-season training on the Schuylkill as a guest of the University in March 1984. Brooks School is a prepatory high school in North Andover, Mass. The University allowed the Brooks Crew team to use their motorized boat, shell -- the boat used by rowers -- and safety equipment free of charge. According to the 17-page findings of fact compiled by the judge, Liddle and another coach supervised the training while the head coach was away on the afternoon of the second day of practice. Liddle and coxswain Susan Bully, a Brooks sophomore, were in the motorized boat and began travelling downstream toward the shell, the finding states. 100 yards in front of the Fairmont Dam, the City of Philadelphia had installed a cable across the Schuylkill equipped with hanging vertical lines in the river. The cable was designed to warn boats that were dangerously close to the dam, while the vertical cables could be used to stabilize a boat in the event of an emergency -- either by tying them to the craft or manually holding on to them. However, the propeller of the boat became entangled in the vertical cables, causing the engine to stall. Bully grabbed one of the cables, while Liddle untangled the propeller. But, according to the findings of fact, Liddle did not secure her boat by using the rope attached to the boat or the vertical safety lines before detaching it from the cable, and the craft began to drift toward the dam. "It was impossible to hold the boat and the boat started to float to the dam," University attorney John Barret said yesterday. "Instead of remaining with the boat, she jumped out." A group of three rescuers set out to aid Liddle and told her by megaphone not to leave the boat. But she handed Bully a flotation device and forced her out of the boat and then jumped out herself, the document states. Liddle was swept over the dam and plummeted to her death. Bully was not injured and was able to walk out of the river to shore. The rescuer's boat subsequently stalled and was swept over the dam, but they remained in the boat and were not hurt. "If Liddle had just done nothing she would have been safe," Barret added. "They would have brought her in and she would have been fine." Brooks Athletics Supervisor Dan Rourke declined to comment and Liddle's attorney did not return phone calls placed at his office. The case against the City of Philadelphia is still pending.
(11/15/91 10:00am)
Maria Sierotowicz has some stiff demands. She wants Sheldon Hackney put away for life, along with Michael Aiken and every University admissions officer. And while she's at it, she wants to shut the University down. Claimimg she was unfairly denied admission to the University, and 10 other schools, Sierotowicz filed suit against them all this week in federal court in Washington, D.C. Her 16-page complaint, written by herself, is almost completely unintelligible, breaks every rule of grammar and jumps from charge to charge almost randomly. Sierotowicz accuses the schools of malversations, frauds and denying her the right to "have a money, to settle own family." But in her 16-page complaint, she fails to outline exactly how she was discriminated against. She filed the suit against three campuses of the City University of New York, American University, George Washington University, Howard University, Trinity College in Washington D.C., the University of the District of Columbia, Georgetown University and LaSalle University. Sierotowicz, who is acting as her own attorney, filed the complaint in Washington D.C. Monday, but New York Telephone operators said there was no such person at the Brooklyn address she listed in the complaint. There are no listings for her in Washington or Philadelphia either. Sierotowicz has charged the University with violating her "Constitutional" rights, including the right to be educated, to chose a job of her interest, to have proper housing and to have "money which is a basis for human daily life." Sierotowicz claims she applied to the University for the fall 1990 semester and was rejected. She adds that she subsequently filed discrimination complaints against the University with the Office for Civil Rights. But the University is not concerned with the allegations Sierotowicz has slung, administrators said. Sierotowicz's complaint indicates that she attempted to use the federal Freedom of Information Act to see her personal and educational files, but was denied access. She alleges that the records are incorrect and that she has not had the opportunity to fix them. She also states that one campus of the City University used "force in stuffing" her into another program of study against her will. She adds that the university "made a some of malversations and the frauds" in her financial records while she was receiving federal and state financial aid. The complainant also alleges that the University and the other institutions have shirked their responsibilities to provide educational services for U.S. citizens and their children.
(11/14/91 10:00am)
A blind Law School student who fell down an uncovered 50-foot SEPTA shaft on 36th and Walnut streets last month is considering suing "parties" responsible for the accident, according to his lawyer. "We are investigating his rights and [determining] which parties might be responsible," said attorney Gerald McHugh. He would not say if the University is one of the parties. McHugh said that second-year Law student Gerald Jeandron has not been out of his room without assistance since the accident, where he suffered injuries to the left side of his body, including his hand. He broke several bones in the fall. "[Jeandron] can not write or read by himself," McHugh said. "[Braille] requires the use of two hands." According to witnesses, the metal grate which usually covers the deep shaft had been missing since the day before the incident. They also said they saw the hole left open and unattended overnight. SEPTA spokesperson Jim Whittacker said last month that he "didn't know" why the cover of the shaft was missing and added that they had placed barricades around the hole after receiving a complaint the night before. University officials said yesterday that the University is not liable since the student fell down a shaft owned and maintained by SEPTA -- not the University. "It's a SEPTA manhole," Claims Supervisor Ron Jasner said. "What is the University's responsibility to a SEPTA manhole?" Jasner added that the University has taken various actions to help Jeandron and provide him with medical care.
(11/11/91 10:00am)
Proponents of a suit against the University said an advertisement in two local newspapers Friday was "a cheap public relations trick" designed to undermine their suit which criticizes the University's relationship with the city. Full-page ads in Friday's Philadelphia Inquirer and Philadelphia Daily News offer the University's congratulation to the winners of last Tuesday's mayoral and City Council elections. The ads also assert the University's commitment to the city, and lists over 60 campus organizations and programs -- including the West Philadelphia Improvement Corps, the Law School's "Pro Bono Program" and the Kite and Key Society -- that assist city residents. The list also includes the University's Mayor's Scholarship Program. A Philadelphia law center and three campus groups have sued the University over the program, charging that the administration does not provide enough of these scholarships. The complaint also faults the University with not publicizing the program. "[The ad] is a blatant and transparent attempt by the Hackney administration to avoid the consequences of their conduct for the past 14 years," said Associate Law Professor Ralph Smith, a member of one of the campus organizations listed as a plaintiff in the suit. "[The administration] will engage in public relations gimmicks to persuade people inside and outside the University that the University is a good citizen in Philadelphia," added Smith, a member of the African-American Association of Faculty, Staff and Administrators. But despite the fact the money did not come from the University, Thomas Gilhool, the attorney from the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia, said yesterday that it was not coincidental that ads ran shortly after PILCOP filed the Mayor's Scholarship suit. "It is not a coincidence, it is not even a fishy coincidence -- it is boldfaced, astonishingly boldfaced," Gilhool said. "They must not be terribly confident of their reading of the ordinance." The suit over the scholarships centers around a series of ordinances condensed in 1977, in which the University agreed "to establish and forever maintain at least 125 four-year full tuition scholarships or their equivalent" in exchange for parcels of land. The University and PILCOP disagree whether the number of scholarships should be 125 total for all classes each year or 125 new scholarships each year -- for a total of 500. University officials said yesterday that the ad was not in response to the suit, but rather as a "morale-boosting gesture" for the city. "I think the intent of the ad was to reflect that Penn does a number of positive things for the city of Philadelphia and has a commitment to the city and residents," Budget Director Stephen Golding said last night. Hackney said last night the ad was designed to encourage Philadelphians to come together and help the city out of its current financial problems. "Our future is wound up in the future of the city of Philadelphia," the president said. "The University clearly has a lot at stake and a long-term self interest. If the city doesn't thrive we won't thrive." Hackney added that the ads are consistent with other "votes of confidence" by the administration, including prepaying the University's wage taxes last year and buying city bonds. "The ad shows some of the formal mechanisms that Penn people contribute," Hackney said. "Penn is willing to help." The Inquirer and Daily News advertising departments could not be reached for comment over the weekend, but the cost has been estimated at over $10,000 for the two ads. Vice President of Development Rick Nahm said last night that many alumni who had returned for the Homecoming weekend were pleased with advertisement and impressed with the amount of work the University does for the community. "The alumni were positive and excited about the involvement," Nahm said. "The outcome of the election is the appropriate time, the right time to pledge support to the government and Philadelphia certainly needs the momentum."
(11/11/91 10:00am)
Maneesh Chawla is a week behind schedule. "We needed our bulkpacks the second week, but we only got them the third," the Wharton freshman said. "The paper has been put off and the entire syllabus has been set back a week." Students and professors across campus said that even after two months, they are behind in their classes and spending more for their bulkpacks due to a May federal court decision which required copy centers to secure permission from publishers prior to making bulkpacks. "It was a disappointment," Political Science Professor Oliver Williams said last month. "They are partial packs not as complete in the past -- [the copy store] was not prepared and I wasn't prepared." Williams said that the copy store he used could not get permission from all of the publishers and therefore he has to rely on students using books held on reserve. Williams added he always kept books on reserve, but expected a balance between those that would purchase the bulkpack and the few who used the library. Prior to the ruling on Basic Books vs. Kinko's Graphics Co., many of the works were printed in bulkpacks without publisher consent because photocopy centers felt they fell under the "fair use" clause of 1976 copyright laws. Students also complained that the bulkpacks are more expensive since the cost to secure the rights is now handed down to the students. Mark Drake, Campus Copy Center permissions manager, said earlier this semester that charges from publishers vary from free to fifty cents per page. "Kinko's required $15 extra per student for copyright costs," Chawla said. But many students found a silver lining to the new system. "It means less readings," College junior Eugene Chay said last night. "I do feel somewhat cheated, but gratified that I won't have to do as much reading -- no, I won't lose sleep over it." Professors and students added they are uncertain what will happen in upcoming semesters. "I'm not sure what the future holds," American Civilization Professor Murray Murphey said. "I'm not sure if anyone knows at this point what is going to happen." Williams agreed and added that he is unsure if the situation could be fixed. "The rules are changing and the publishers were flooded with permission requests," Williams said. "It has not been as convenient or efficient as in the past. Whether this can be licked I don't know."
(11/07/91 10:00am)
Maneesh Chawla is a week behind schedule. "We needed our bulkpacks the second week, but we only got them the third," the Wharton freshman said. "The paper has been put off and the entire syllabus has been set back a week." Students and professors across campus said that even after two months, they are behind in their classes and spending more for their bulkpacks due to a May federal court decision which required copy centers to secure permission from publishers prior to making bulkpacks. "It was a disappointment," Political Science Professor Oliver Williams said last month. "They are partial packs not as complete in the past -- [the copy store] was not prepared and I wasn't prepared." Williams said that the copy store he used could not get permission from all of the publishers and therefore he has to rely on students using books held on reserve. Williams added he always kept books on reserve, but expected a balance between those that would purchase the bulkpack and the few who used the library. Prior to the ruling on Basic Books vs. Kinko's Graphics Co., many of the works were printed in bulkpacks without publisher consent because photocopy centers felt they fell under the "fair use" clause of 1976 copyright laws. Students also complained that the bulkpacks are more expensive since the cost to secure the rights is now handed down to the students. Mark Drake, Campus Copy Center permissions manager, said earlier this semester that charges from publishers vary from free to fifty cents per page. "Kinko's required $15 extra per student for copyright costs," Chawla said. But many students found a silver lining to the new system. "It means less readings," College junior Eugene Chay said last night. "I do feel somewhat cheated, but gratified that I won't have to do as much reading -- no, I won't lose sleep over it." Professors and students added they are uncertain what will happen in upcoming semesters. "I'm not sure what the future holds," American Civilization Professor Murray Murphey said. "I'm not sure if anyone knows at this point what is going to happen." Williams agreed and added that he is unsure if the situation could be fixed. "The rules are changing and the publishers were flooded with permission requests," Williams said. "It has not been as convenient or efficient as in the past. Whether this can be licked I don't know."
(11/05/91 10:00am)
Freshmen and sophomores who had spent the last six weeks rushing Tau Epsilon Phi and Acacia fraternities said last night they did not intend to change their plans to sign bids for the fraternities, despite findings of collective responsibility for hazing and sexual harassment. "I thought about it and decided to continue with the bid process," College sophomore and Acacia rush Geoff Ott said last night. "I'm here and I might as well stay here." But many rushes from both fraternities said last night that neither fraternity informed them of the ongoing investigations, which began last year. They also said they were not aware of the potential sanctions the fraternities could receive. Many signed with fraternities last night at Bid Night -- the annual event when rushes officially designate which fraternity they will pledge. Tricia Phaup, director of the Office of Fraternity and Sorority Affairs, and Interim Judicial Inquiry Officer Jane Combrinck-Graham said yesterday that according to University procedures, each fraternity could face a wide range of penalties from probation to revocation of their charters. Several TEP rushes said last night that they were unaware of the investigation or had heard of it only informally. One said he overheard brothers discussing it and another said he had heard it from individuals outside the fraternity. "We were not told, but they probably will tell us after we get our bids," said another TEP rush, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. "I think they should tell us, but I would stay because I really enjoy TEP a lot." TEP president Jeremy Sokolic declined to comment and Acacia president Brian Baxt did not return phone messages placed at his home yesterday. One Acacia rush, College and Engineering sophomore Matt Bixler, said he has known of the event since last semester, but was "honored" to pledge Acacia. "I know what the problem is, I've known about it," Bixler said. "It's something that got out of control." "After I read it, I was feeling a little 'uh-oh,' " the College freshman said. "But I talked to some brothers about it and they said they wouldn't be caught with a major offense." Combrinck-Graham said yesterday that she did not know whether the fraternities had informed their rushes and added that it is not in her jurisdiction. "In general, I certainly think that one of the reasons why organizations can get themselves as a body in trouble is because they don't promptly keep their members informed of developments that have an impact on the body," Combrinck-Graham said. "But there is no requirement in the policies and procedures that they do it."
(11/05/91 10:00am)
The Judicial Inquiry Office has found the Acacia and Tau Epsilon Phi fraternities collectively responsible for a sexual harassment case and three hazing incidents, respectively, University officials said yesterday. A finding of collective responsibility means that the house as a whole can be held liable for a University policy violation and can be punished as a whole. The last reported finding of collective responsibility of a fraternity by the JIO was Psi Upsilon. Psi U was ultimately kicked off campus. Interim JIO Jane Combrinck-Graham said yesterday that she had turned her findings in both cases over to the Office of Fraternity and Sorority Affairs, but has not yet submitted a recommendation for sanctions against either fraternity. She added that the penalties for both fraternities could range from probation to revocation of the fraternity's charter, as mandated by University policy. "I have received it from the JIO and there is no recommendation, just findings," OFSA Director Tricia Phaup said yesterday. "If I am unable to reach a settlement it will go to the Fraternity and Sorority Advisory Board." Acacia fraternity brothers have been charged with sexual harassment for stealing and circulating a nude photograph of a brother's girlfriend to other members of the house. The complainant, a female University student, said that during a pledging event one or several members of the spring pledge class were instructed to perform a skit in front of her boyfriend and other brothers. The pledge was to assume the position that the complainant had taken in the photo, she added. "In my opinion they are definitely responsible collectively," the complainant said last night. "This has been a long and painful process for all parties involved and I hope it will be fully resolved soon." Acacia National Executive Director Darold Larson declined to comment on the issue, and Acacia chapter president Brian Baxt did not return several telephone messages left at his home. Former JIO Constance Goodman said this summer she had found TEP collectively responsible for two incidents of hazing, but the third hazing incident was announced yesterday. TEP president Jeremy Sokolic said he had not been notified of the findings. "I don't have any official action from any University office as of yet," the Wharton senior said. Combrinck-Graham added yesterday that the three hazing incidents will be treated together. "Although there are three separate incidents they reflect a pattern of behavior -- an attitude on the part of the chapter," Combrinck-Graham said. "We may go further and single out people. I also have the alternative to single out individuals and find if they are in violation of the code of conduct and state and federal [regulations]." Phaup added yesterday that findings concerning individuals would not be referred to her office. Jonathan Seidel, the Executive Director of TEP's national office, did not return telephone messages placed at his office yesterday. The cases, which both date back to the last academic year, were handled as quickly as possible, Combrinck-Graham said. She added that the investigations were delayed for two reasons -- the summer break and the fact that she needed to become familiar with the investigations since Goodman had handled them last year. "In both cases I believe [Goodman] acted expeditiously and I acted very expeditiously," Combrinck-Graham said. "A summer intervened and a number of pieces of information did not come to this office until literally right before spring classes ended." The process the investigation will follow is detailed in the Fraternity/Sorority Advisory Board Judicial Charter. According to University policy, after the JIO completes the investigation, Phaup and Combrinck-Graham will decide if there is "reasonable cause to believe that a chapter has violated the Recognition Policy." OFSA will then attempt to forge a settlement between all of the parties, but if a settlement cannot be reached, the case will be referred to the Fraternity and Sorority Advisory Board. "The other role of the director of OFSA is to determine whether my report is founded," Combrinck-Graham added. "[Phaup] and I are now in consultation as to whether either of those chapters have violated the recognition policy."
