DOCSLIB.ORG

Campus Plan 2017

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Campus Plan 2017 SEPTEMBER 1, 2016 1, SEPTEMBER CAMPUS PLAN 2017 - 2036 TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD ................................................................................................................... 1 SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 2 1.1 Georgetown University in the District of Columbia ................................................ 2 1.2 University Programs and Opportunities ................................................................ 2 1.2.1 Academic Programs................................................................................... 2 1.2.2 Research ................................................................................................... 3 1.2.3 Residential Life .......................................................................................... 3 1.2.4 MedStar Georgetown University Hospital .................................................. 3 1.2.5 Cultural and Civic Opportunities ................................................................ 4 1.2.6 Religious Programs.................................................................................... 5 1.2.7 Athletic Programs and Events .................................................................... 5 1.2.8 Ancillary Campus Activities ........................................................................ 5 1.2.9 Collaboration with Local Institutions and Other Organizations ................... 6 1.3 The Georgetown Community Partnership ............................................................ 6 1.3.1 The Campus Within the Community .......................................................... 6 1.3.2 A Successful Model for Consensus-Based Planning ................................. 7 1.3.2.1 Steering Committee ...................................................................... 7 1.3.2.2 Working Groups ............................................................................ 7 1.3.2.3 Communication and Transparency ............................................... 8 1.3.3 The GCP and the Campus Plan ................................................................ 8 1.3.3.1 Compliance with the 2010 Campus Plan ...................................... 8 1.3.3.2 Development of the 2017 Campus Plan ....................................... 9 1.3.3.3 Implementation of the New Campus Plan ................................... 10 SECTION 2: PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE .............................................................. 12 2.1 Georgetown University in the 21st Century ......................................................... 12 2.2 University Master Planning Initiatives ................................................................. 12 2.2.1 The Future of the University at its Historic Main Campus ........................ 13 2.2.2 Georgetown Downtown............................................................................ 14 2.2.3 MedStar Georgetown University Hospital Planning ................................. 14 SECTION 3: THE GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY 2017 – 2036 CAMPUS PLAN ........ 16 3.1 Campus Populations .......................................................................................... 16 3.1.1 Student Populations ................................................................................. 16 3.1.2 Faculty and Staff ...................................................................................... 17 3.2 The Future Campus: Enhanced Physical Environment and Facilities ................ 17 3.2.1 Architectural Considerations .................................................................... 17 3.2.2 Stewardship of Existing Resources.......................................................... 18 3.2.3 Optionality ................................................................................................ 18 GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036 Page i 3.2.4 Organized and Strategic Growth to Enhance the Living and Learning Experience ............................................................................................... 19 3.2.4.1 Creating a Vibrant Student Life Corridor ..................................... 19 3.2.4.2 Student Housing ......................................................................... 20 3.2.4.3 Athletics and Recreation Uses .................................................... 21 3.2.4.4 Academic Opportunities .............................................................. 21 3.2.4.5 MGUH Medical/Surgical Pavilion ................................................ 22 3.2.5 Creating a More Pedestrian-Friendly Campus ......................................... 23 3.2.5.1 An Emphasis on Open Space and Active Campus Connections .. 23 3.2.5.2 Circulation Improvements ........................................................... 24 3.3 Conservation Issues ........................................................................................... 24 3.3.1 Historic Resources ................................................................................... 25 3.3.2 Sustainability Considerations and Environmental Impacts....................... 25 3.4 Comprehensive Transportation Planning ........................................................... 26 3.4.1 Transportation Demand Management (TDM) .......................................... 26 3.4.2 Parking..................................................................................................... 28 3.5 Managing Off-Campus Activities and Impacts .................................................... 28 3.6 Proposed Conditions of Approval ....................................................................... 29 SECTION 4: COMPLIANCE WITH THE CAMPUS PLAN REGULATIONS .................. 30 4.1 Sub-section 101.1: Educational Use by a College or University ........................ 30 4.2 Sub-section 101.2: The Uses Shall Be Located so They Are Not Likely to Become Objectionable to Neighboring Property ................................................. 30 4.3 Sub-sections 101.3 and 101.4: Analysis of Incidental Uses .............................. 30 4.4 Sub-sections 101.5 through 101.7: Campus Development Standards .............. 31 4.5 Sub-section 101.8: Plan for Campus as a Whole, Showing the Location, Height and Bulk, Where Appropriate, of all Present and Proposed Improvements ........ 31 4.5.1 Buildings, Parking, and Loading Facilities................................................ 31 4.5.2 Screening, Signs, Streets, and Public Utility Facilities ............................. 31 4.5.3 Athletic and Other Recreational Facilities ................................................ 32 4.5.4 Description of all Activities Conducted or to be Conducted on the Campus, and the Capacity of all Present and Proposed Campus Development .... 32 4.6 Sub-sections 101.9 and 101.15: Further Processing for Specific Buildings, Structures, and Uses .......................................................................................... 32 4.7 Sub-section 101.10: No Interim Use of Land or Improved Property Proposed .. 33 4.8 Sub-section 101.11: Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan ....................... 33 4.9 Sub-section 101.13: Referral to the District of Columbia Office of Planning, Department of Transportation, and Department of the Environment .................. 33 4.10 Sub-section 101.14: Application is in Harmony with the Zoning Regulations .... 33 4.11 Sub-section 101.16: A Further Processing of a Campus Building Shall Not be Filed Simultaneously with a Full Campus Plan Application................................. 34 4.12 Section 102: Special Exception for Use of Commercial Property by a College or University ............................................................................................................ 34 SECTION 5: CONCLUSION ........................................................................................ 35 GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036 Page ii TABLE OF EXHIBITS EXHIBIT A University Charter EXHIBIT B Aerial Photograph of Campus EXHIBIT C Existing Conditions EXHIBIT D Existing Campus Land Uses EXHIBIT E Georgetown University in the District of Columbia EXHIBIT F Campus Neighborhood Context EXHIBIT G Campus Plan Compliance Milestones EXHIBIT H Georgetown Downtown EXHIBIT I Enrollment EXHIBIT J Faculty and Staff EXHIBIT K Development Program Summary EXHIBIT L Proposed Twenty-Year Development Plan EXHIBIT M Proposed Twenty-Year Development Plan Land Uses EXHIBIT N Proposed Student Life Corridor EXHIBIT O Undergraduate Student Housing Commitment EXHIBIT P Athletic and Other Recreational Facilities EXHIBIT Q Proposed Hospital and Medical Center District EXHIBIT R Existing Open Spaces and Pedestrian Circulation EXHIBIT S Proposed Open Spaces and Pedestrian Circulation EXHIBIT T Proposed Material Palette EXHIBIT U Existing Tree Canopy Map EXHIBIT V Proposed Tree Canopy Map EXHIBIT W1 Campus Topography – Elevation Map EXHIBIT W2 Campus Topography – Slope Percentage Map EXHIBIT X Existing Loading and Service Areas EXHIBIT Y Proposed Loading and Service Areas EXHIBIT Z Campus Wayfinding EXHIBIT AA Sustainability Plan for Campus Operations EXHIBIT BB Existing Pervious Surface Coverage Diagram EXHIBIT CC Proposed Pervious Surface Coverage Diagram EXHIBIT DD Existing Vehicular Circulation and Parking Facilities EXHIBIT EE Proposed Vehicular Circulation and Parking Facilities EXHIBIT FF Proposed Conditions of Approval EXHIBIT GG MedStar Health, Inc. and Community Representatives Agreement GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036 Page
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Summer Programs for High School Students
    Summer Programs for summer.georgetown.edu/hoyas2015 High School Students Summer Programs for summer.georgetown.edu/hoyas2015 High School Students SUMMER AT GEORGETOWN SUMMER PROGRAMS FOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS INTRODUCTION ........................................................................... 2 SUMMER PROGRAMS .................................................................... 3 Institutes & Fundamentals ........................................................ 3 College Prep ............................................................................ 4 Summer College Courses & Summer Honors Intensive ................... 5 PROGRAM CALENDAR ................................................................... 6 SUBJECT AREAS ........................................................................... 8 Arts & Humanities .................................................................... 8 Business ................................................................................10 Government ...........................................................................11 Law .......................................................................................13 Medicine & Science .................................................................14 CAMPUS LIFE ..............................................................................16 APPLICATION INFORMATION & CHECKLIST .....................................18 FOR PARENTS .............................................................................20 High school students who participated
    [Show full text]
  • Corp Hit with Rent Increase
    58th Year, No. 12 GEO~GETOWN UNIVERSITY, WASHINGTON, D.C. Friday, November 18, 1977 MCFCPanel Calls Tuition Corp Hit With Hike Unfair Rent Increase by Val Reitman "A differential tuition is a de by Mike Walsh mentioned that one possibility for facto policy of undergraduate educa­ Student Corporation officials have increased Corp. revenue is the pur­ tion subsidizing graduate education, disclosed that an incremental rent chase of the refrigerators which are and this should not be undertaken increase, of 250% over the next three leased to the crew team and then without a full discussion of the years will be charged yb the Univer­ rented to students. Those refrigera­ implications by the MCFC and the sity in order to pay the total Corp tors are now leased by the Corp. Council of Deans," emphasized the overhead costs. While Vital Vittles Stubbs, however, disagreed with Main Campus Finance Subcommittee will be most effected by the decision, Benton's assumption that prices on Enrollments, Admissions, Tuition Corp office space will also feel the would not be increased. While and Financial Aid at its meeting last increases. emphasizing that he would attempt Friday. The statement was a reaf­ This year the Corp. will pay to keep prices constant, Stubbs firmation of the recommendation of $2,862 to the University. The new speculated that the rent increase the committee made to the Main agreement hammered out by Corp coupled with the drastic minimum Committee during the summer. and University officials calls for wage increase which takes effect next The Subcommittee was asked to payments of aDoroximately $5,000 January will necessitate some in­ $7,000 reconvene by Graduate School Dean in fiscal ¥ear 1978, in F.Y.
    [Show full text]
  • Midterm Report
    GUSA Cabinet and Staff President: Enushe Khan Vice President: Chris Fisk Chief of Staff: Ari Goldstein Deputy Chiefs of Staff: Mahwish Bari, Sam Granville, Casey Nolan, Olivia Hinerfeld, Garet Williams, Pat Sullivan, and Zac Schroepfer Director and Deputy Director of Communications: Natalia Pena and Thomas Massad Secretary: Megan Yeager Treasurer: Jared Ison Historian: Matt Hinson Director of Federal and D.C. Relations: Kotryna Jukneviciute Director of the Student Advocacy Office: Jack Nalen Co-Directors of Freshman Outreach: Harry Clow and Erin Luck What’s a Hoya Coordinators: Sara Castiglia, Mara Goldman, and Ashwin Puri Speaker of the Senate: Richie Mullaney Vice Speaker of the Senate: Cherie Vu Chair of Academic Affairs: Brendan Saunders Chair of Accessibility: Dani Zamalin Chair of the Arts: Katie Rosengarten Chair of Athletic Affairs: Carter Rise Chair of Dining and Auxiliary Services: Mark Camilli Chair of Entrepreneurship: Jake Maxmin Chair of Free Speech: D.J. Angelini Liaison to Greek Life: Tucker Cowden Chair of LGBTQ Inclusivity: Grace Smith Chair of Mental Health: Sylvia Levy Chair of Race and Cultural Inclusivity: Alex Alonso Chair of Religious Inclusivity: Evan Waddill Chair of Residential Living: Christopher Holshouser Chair of Safety and Sexual Assault Policy: Maddy Moore Chair and Vice Chair of Socioeconomic Inclusivity: Emily Kaye and Cameron White Liaisons to Student Organizations: Ricardo Mondolfi and Annabelle Timsit Co-Chairs of Student Worker Affairs: Laura Fairman and Obed Ventura Co-Chairs of Sustainability: Ben Zimmer
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Rent Hike Vexes Vital Vittles Pub Book Outlines Benefits
    58th Year, No.3 GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY, WASHIN~TON, D.C. Saturday, September 10, 1977 Proposed Rent Hike Vexes Vital Vittles Zac Casey don't think the Corp will have any one third of the cost for maintaining The space Vital Vittles occupies trouble covering an increase of this a security guard." size." Shuerman explained this phe· • S liIMER ',1 in Healy basement could be reo classified as a high rent district, if the Benton argued, "The majority of nomenon saying, "True, the store and MOth"R" ,SAl university's proposed one hundred to our profits are poured back into the store offices don't get housekeeping SAT&SUH11AJ1; one hundred and fifty percent rent corporation; .while the remainder services, but then again, Vital Vittles ~AftD - YOO-T~ hike goes into effect, say Student goes toward funding academic and generates a lot of garbage for the rest . We "ST S Corporation officials. social services for the University, of the University. "Absurd," retorted ~RO~l!N VC As to the effect this might have such as the new recycling program Benton. "There isn't a store in the on prices at Georgetown's student UNICYCLE and financing an ac­ world responsible for the garbage its run grocery store, Corp VP John ademic scholarship for future' G.U. customers make." Benton said that he didn't have any studen ts." "Something's got to go," said exact figures, but speculated that We use a lot of electricity in the Benton, "we either cut services or prices would definitely go up. store,"Benton said," but for the rent raise prices.
    [Show full text]
  • The President's Interfaith and Community Service Campus
    THE PRESIDENT’S INTERFAITH AND COMMUNITY SERVICE CAMPUS CHALLENGE INSTITUTION LEAD STAFF GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY Christina Ciocca [email protected] Melody Fox Ahmed [email protected] 37th & O Streets, NW Lisa Pannucci [email protected] Ray Shiu [email protected] Washington, DC 20057 INSTITUTION LEAD STUDENT President John J. DeGioia Aamir Hussein, Student Interfaith Council President [email protected] http://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu/projects/presidents-interfaith-challenge/ 1 UNIVERSITY OFFICES & CENTERS: • Berkley Center for Religion, Peace and World Affairs • Kalmonavitz Initiative • Catholic Studies Department • McDonough School of Business • Center for Contemporary Arab Studies • Mission and Ministry • Center for Minority Educational Affairs • Mortara Center • Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding • Office of Campus Ministry • Center for Social Justice Research, Teaching and • Office of Communications Service • Office of the President • Center for Student Programs • Philosophy Department • Chaplains and Jesuits in Residence • Program for Jewish Civilization • The College • Program in Education, Inquiry and Justice • Faith in Action DC • Program on Justice and Peace • Faith Leaders for Community Change • Psychology Department • Film Studies Department • Residence Life • The Gelardin New Media Center • School of Continuing Studies • Government Department • School of Foreign Service • Georgetown Public Policy Institute • School of Nursing and Health Studies • GUWellness • Theology Department • History Department
    [Show full text]
  • Gives up Autonomy by Jim Colaprico Students of Georgetown, Inc
    55th Year, No. 19 GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY, WASHINGTON, D.C. Friday, February 28, 1975 Corp. to Pay Rent; Gives Up Autonomy by Jim Colaprico Students of Georgetown, Inc. has agreed to pay rent to the University for the space it uses in Healy Basement and to surrender a certain amount of its authority over the extention of its services in an effort to end the legal controversies regarding its relationship to the university. Besides the payment of rent, an evaluating committee will be set up to determine whether the corp's lease should be renewed each year. Also, any new programs that the corp wishes to institute must first be studied by Off-Campus Affairs Dean William Scheurman. If disagreement develops between Scheurman and the corp, the evaluating team will be the final arbitor. The recommendations are subject to the approval of University President Rev. R. J. Henle, SJ. "Our main goal was to draw a and the administration, is a vice president of the corp, said. distinction between the corp as a surrendering of a certain amount "In a limited sense, we have separate entity in itself and the of corp autonomy, student gov· traded off a small portion of our University Corporation as a emment leaders expressed the view independence, but I think that we _whole," Student Development that it was "a necessary thing," are getting the better edge out of Vice President Dr. Patricia Rue- "We have to recognize that any the deal," incoming SG President ckel said. She explained that these gripe made against the corp will Dave Ralston commented.
    [Show full text]
  • PDF Download
    GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY Contents 2 4 8 12 18 Georgetown Undergraduate Graduate and Pathways to Campus and Across the Globe Programs Professional Global Careers City Life Education Thank you for your interest in Georgetown University. Georgetown is a leading student-centered research university, based in Washington, DC, and open to the world. We are home to more than 18,000 undergraduate, graduate, and professional students preparing to serve and lead in sectors across the world—from business, health, and law to policy, science, humanities, and the arts. At Georgetown, we sustain a supportive learning environment that enables students to grow intellectually and personally in community with others. Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, we have prioritized the well-being of our students, maintaining our commitment to academic excellence and world-class instruction, whether remote or in-person. Our students develop theoretical knowledge and a practical outlook, enabling them to be uniquely prepared to meet the complex challenges of our world. Over the past 50 years, we have made a remarkable transition from a leading national university to a truly global institution. Since our founding more than two centuries ago, Georgetown has been deeply committed to our international identity and to welcoming students and scholars from around the world. Today, this commitment has never been stronger—with students and faculty from more than 135 countries, more than 180 study abroad programs, more than 250 academic partnerships with institutions across the world, and a global network of alumni. As a global institution, we are committed not only to sustaining a diverse international community but also to engaging global challenges and pursuing research, teaching, and service from a global perspective.
    [Show full text]
  • 1975-01-31.Pdf (2.4MB)
    55th Year, No. 15 GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY, WASHINGTON, D.C. Friday, January 31, 1975 Dean Protested; Airlines Try Leslie Boycotts To Reinstate by Lisa Smith Youth Fares Student reaction to the Student Government Lecture Commission's contract with John Dean has polarized to the extent that a petition, by Jim Co/aprico expressing disapproval at having Dean speak, is being circulated and will The International Air Trans­ be submitted to the Student Senate at its next meeting on February 2. port Association has initiated an The petition objects to allowing Dean to speak at Georgetown because, appeal to the federal government asking it to allow them to rein­ in doing SO, we are "tacitly encouraging the practice of rewarding serious and sensational crime" and state the use of youth fares that "endorsing the notion that crime ment to do everything possible to provide discount rates to individ­ does indeed pay. " Jonathan prohibit the payment of uals of ages 12-21. These dis­ Orloff, author of the petition, $3,000.00 to Dean, which Orloff counts were prohibited by the explained that he would like to found to be unethical and "exces­ government over a year ago when see the students "come out as a sive". But after more discussion claims were made that they are student body in not condoning with students, Orloff revised his discriminatory. If the appeal is successful the member airlines will this. " petition, softening his original Georgetown students have rallied their forces in protest to the When asked for his reaction to request to the Lecture Commis­ resume youth fares on April 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Study Shows Some Profs
    56th Year, No. 18 GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY, WASHINGTON, D.C. Friday, Febraury 13, 1976 - ~ Study Shows Some Profs. Holding Books for Years by Margaret Henry town is one of seven offering the privilege. that the library does not havt' control ovpr More than 1000 library books borrowed Under Georgetown's current faculty professors' borrowing or ovt'r 'fA borrow· by University Professors when George borrowing policy, books loaned to teachers ing, since most Teacher Assistants often McGovern was running for President are are automatically renewed after two weeks, use their professors' library cards. He also still on loan for the same teachers. unless the book is requested. In this case, charged that thp library is theoretically Circulation librarian LiUamaude Ham· the library recalls the book after it has buying books for the professors when mond told The HOYA this week that been checked out for at least the initial department approved orders are SUbmitted 1,074 books have been held by faculty for two weeks by the faculty member. to the library, the professor reserves it first. six months, 2,043 for one year, 1,034 for Mrs. Hammond reported that recalls and thereby monopolizes the book. He two years, 656 for three years and 1,071 (consisting of two notes and a call from commented. "I think student pressure for four or more years. University librarian Joe Jeffs as a last might help the situation. The library is Georgetown traditionally has main· result) addressed to faculty are, for the hurting for student input." tained an unlimited loan policy, and it is most part, not a problem.
    [Show full text]
  • SJU Gargoyles
    Welcome to Saint Joseph’s University and to Barbelin Hall* Named for founder and first president, Felix J. Barbelin, S.J. (b. France 1808-69) Dedicated November 13, 1927 Architect, Francis Ferdinand Durang Builder, John McShain, ’22 By Carmen R. Croce ’71 When Saint Joseph’s College decided to separate from St. Joseph’s Prep in 1922 and to establish a new campus, it chose a site on the western edge of the City of Philadelphia, high above its historic center. By November 1927, in its 76th year, Saint Joseph’s achieved its longed-for goal of a Collegiate Gothic college on a hill with room to grow. After three moves in its brief history, the soaring 150-foot-high Barbelin Tower, reputed to mark the highest point in the city, served as a most distinguished exclamation point to the message that Saint Joseph’s had finally arrived. In its first seventy-five years, Saint Joseph’s built and developed two other sites that included parish churches, and secondary and primary schools, a model typical of Jesuit educational institutions that sought to form its students from adolescence to adulthood and to benefit from a reliable income stream to underwrite tuition-free education. Thus, the new City Avenue campus was a significant departure from that traditional model and a leap of faith for Saint Joseph’s, absent the reliable financial support of a parish church and the reliable enrollment feed of an on-site secondary school. This reckoning with the realities of higher education in twentieth- century America also served to strengthen the urban mission strategy of the Jesuits, for as the city grew and expanded its borders outside the city center, so, too, did Saint Joseph’s, ever more prepared to bring Jesuit education to bear on the urban environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Tjr David Avitabile
    RECEIVED J.C OFFJCE Of ZONINL .~tq;p&Storrs Dav1d M Av1tablle 2014 NOV 25 PM t,: 31 dav1tablle@goulstonstorrs com 202-721-1137 Tel November 25,2014 Hand Dehvered Anthony Hood, Chairperson D C Zorung Commission 441 4th Street, NW, Swte 200 South Washington, DC 20001 Re: Z.C. Case No. 10-32: Georgetown University Campus Plan Fall2014 Compliance Report Dear Chrurman Hood and Members of the Commission Enclosed please fmd Georgetown Uruversity's Fall2014 Compliance Report, which was preparedJomtly by the Uruversity and the Georgetown Commuruty Partnership The Report IS being filed With the Zorung Administrator today Smcerely yours, !)_ tJr David AVItabile cc Matthew Le Grant, D C Zorung Admlrustrator Ronald LeWis, ANC 2E Ed Solomon, ANC 2E Jeff Jones, ANC 2E Gayle Trotter, ANC 3D Conrad DeWitte, Jr, FCCA Nan Bell, BCA Jennifer Altemus, CAG Chris Augostmi, Georgetown Umversity Robert Groves, Georgetown Uruversity David Rubenstem, Georgetown Uruversity Enk Smulson, Georgetown Uruversity Todd Olson, Georgetown Uruversity Robm Morey, Georgetown Uruversity Lauralyn Lee, Georgetown Uruversity ZOMNG Trevor Tezel, Georgetown Uruversity Student Association <-OMMI~ION ZONING COMMISSION District of Columbia Mary Jacksteit, Justice and Sustamabihty Associates District of ColumbiaCA~ENO.~' gsdocs\8135188 1 Case No. 10-32 ZONINGEXHIBIT COMMISSION NO. Goulston & Storrs PC • Boston • DC • NewDistrict Yor~ of • Columbia Beurn, 1999 K Street, NW • Suite soo • washlrgton, DC 20006 1101 • 202 121 0011 Tel • 202 721 1111 Fax • www goulstonstorrsCASE NO.10-32 com DeletedEXHIBIT NO.398 O RECEIVES "'1 OFFICE OF ZONiNG Executive Summary ZD14 NOV 25 PH 4: 31 Georgetown Umversity, with the support of the Georgetown Commumty Partnership (GCP), IS pleased to submit this second consensus compliance report regardmg Its commitments under the 2010 Georgetown Umvers1ty Campus Plan, as provided m ZC Order No.
    [Show full text]
  • Presidential Race Begins by Joel Szabat in Their Addresses to the !-IOYA
    60th Year, NO.5 GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY, WASHINGTON, D.C. Thursday, February 15, 1979 SG Candidates On Trail; Presidential Race Begins by Joel Szabat In their addresses to the !-IOYA. and ex-Senator Joe Cammaratta's three HOYA Mana}!lTlg Fdilor in the question and answer periods fol­ proposed vice presidents, wanted to February 14-The campaign for Stu­ lowing, the Presidential aspirants were work with the administmtion to solicit dent Body President moved into high nearly unanimous in calling for, "new more alumni contributions. gear today, with eight teams of candi­ sources of revcnuc to lower the 80% de­ A major tenet of the Steele; Tranter dates and their supporters placing pendence on tuition dollars" (Craven): platform would be to work outside of posters, canvassing students, holding "Reorganizing the Student Govern­ the University. with the alumni house, debates and floor meetings, and reveal­ ment" (Ozmun); "Academic credits for to raise contributions. Steele admitted, ing platform similarities which appear student activities" (Polstein); "Oversee­ however, that, as the alumni house is to outweigh their differences. ing and guaranteeing student use of the incorporated outside of the university, Seven of the eight tickets (Joe Cam­ Rec-Plex" (Garafola); and "the use of that there was no guarantee that the marata and Jeff Craven, Joseph Cos­ polls and surveys to determine the feel­ funds raised would work their wav back tello and Timothy Brosnan, Irwin ings of the student body' (Carter). to the main campus. Drucker and Amy Ballou, Martin Predictably, those candidates with Ozmun's proposal would include Garafola and Joe O'Boyle, Scott Oz­ close ties to Student Government "continued work to increase faculty sal­ mun and Tracey Hughes, Jay Polstein stressed, in the words of Student Sena­ aries and the flow (of funds in general) and Carroll Carter, and Charles Steele tor and Main Campus Finance Com­ towards academic areas".
    [Show full text]