Your Geoduck Union: A status report

The Geoduck Union is the Union for the Evergreen student body, working on campus-wide policies that affect the student body, and tackling individual issues students may be having with any part of campus life. The role of the GU is to assert student power and advocate for students.

Formed three years ago, the Geoduck Union is building the foundation for more student power on campus. The Union has facilitated the Nightline bus service, campaigned against rifles for the police, and placed student on campus policy committees. The GU continues to work on many different projects, and is always open to new issues for students to bring to the Union.

This year the GU created an interview process for students seeking positions on campus committees. The first interviews where held on October 27. Turnout from the student body was high, and many committee positions where filled, allowing for student opinion to be heard during campus policymaking. Key committees that now have student voices are the Police Services Community Review Board (pscrb), the Student Conduct Code DTF, and the Food Committee.

Along with placing students on committees, the Geoduck Union passed a bylaw that allows the Union to mediate conflict between students, other members of committees, and members of the campus community. This is a way to ensure student voices are not silenced, keep students feeling safe, and maintain accountability with students serving on committees.

Last year a DTF formed to rewrite the Student Conduct Code. During week 9 of spring quarter, the committee released the proposed new Student Conduct Code for community debate. Many members of the student body had issues with the new conduct code and its effect on student power. Under the rewritten code, most decisions are left solely to the vice president of student affairs. Furthermore, the revised code infringes heavily on the First and Fifth Amendment rights of the US Constitution.

Along with these changes, the code also extended its jurisdiction to regulate actions committed by students while off campus.
Due to its widespread implications on students’ behavior, The Geoduck Union is working to make the process of revising the code more open to the student body. The Union is also working to educate the campus community about what is changing in this policy and how it will affect the lives of all students. At the last Geoduck Union meeting, an official statement on the revised conduct code was issued and a number of students went to the conduct code meeting to inform the committee of student interest.

The Geoduck Union and the Clean Energy Committee (CEC) are holding a winter ballot to vote on a proposal by the CEC, as well as on special initiatives put forth by the GU. This is the first winter election for the Geoduck Union.

When asked why the Clean Energy Committee is working on the ballot, the committee responded with these points of interest:

• We are proposing to add a new student position to the CEC who will work on Climate Action Plan (CAP) projects. The CAP is a list of strategies with a timeline for Evergreen to achieve its sustainability commitment of waste free and carbon neutral by 2020. More information about the CAP is online at blogs.evergreen.edu/sustainability/our-climate-action-plan. This position would allow direct student involvement with campus-wide clean energy projects. The new member will initially serve on the Biomass Gasification research committee, and work on other projects as they arise. They will also participate in regular CEC functions including deciding on grant proposals and planning events. The compensation for this position will be $358 a quarter.
• The current Clean Energy Initiative restricts the purchase of green power to the Pacific Northwest. This is great, because it helps to develop the local economy by creating clean energy infrastructure. If the initiative was expanded to include all of the United States, we could reduce the national carbon footprint by supporting clean energy in places where coal is the main source of energy. In other words, we would reduce more carbon emissions with the same amount of money if we were to purchase renewable energy from coal intensive regions. The CEC wants the students to decide what is more valuable: global carbon reduction or supporting the local economy.
• The current fee structure states that 90% of the Clean Energy fee must be directed towards the purchase of green power, and that 10% will be reserved as grant money for on-campus renewable energy projects. Because of the lowered price of green power and greater energy efficiency on campus, Evergreen only requires 57% of the fee to offset the electricity used on campus. The remaining amount is set aside to be used for on-campus clean energy projects, but it does not state who has the authority to decide how the money will be spent. To make sure that this money is spent with students in mind, we are proposing to change the wording of the initiative to state that the remaining funds after the purchase of green power be redirected to the CEC for allocation. With full access to the remaining funds, we would like to broaden our scope of eligible projects to support resource conservation projects, a clean energy graduate fellowship, and a large-scale community event (the Clean Energy Fair).

In spring 2009, the student body voted to hold quarterly elections. By holding more elections, the student body as a whole can be polled about campus issues and keep policies more updated through student input. Get out and vote—polls will be open during weeks nine and ten.

Below are the official statements the Geoduck Union has made this year. If you have an issue with something on campus, connect with the Geoduck Union, and we will work together towards empowering students, geoduckunion2010@gmail.com.

GU Statement on Gateways for Incarcerated Youth

November 11, 2009

Gateways is a unique program that is becoming nationally known for its work and methods and is an important part of Evergreen community. The Geoduck union supports the efforts of the Gateways program and a 50% tuition reduction for the incarcerated students in Gateways. The tuition reduction would help to demonstrate Evergreen’s commitment to diversity and support for learning across significant differences. The incarcerated students are predominantly students of color, low-income, and first-generation college students. For example, last year the college classes at Maple Lane and Green Hill were composed of nearly 70% students of color, 75% first generation college students, and over 80% poor and working class students.

As the Student union we endorse this tuition reduction and the continued growth of the Gateways program, which is an important part of the Evergreen community, history and student life.

GU Interim Report: Student Conduct Code
[editor’s note: Below citations to the proposed Student Code of Conduct refer to an earlier draft. Although the concerns remain, the cited passages have moved under different headings, indicated in brackets.]

November 4, 2009

On May 22, 2009, the Geoduck Union informed the Student Conduct Code DTF regarding our concerns with their revision to several sections of the proposed code, including the expansion of jurisdiction (Sec. iii a) [now iii.2]. Although some off campus situations may require enforcement of the code, we continue to oppose the consolidation of these judgments to a single administrative position.
“The Vice President for Student Affairs shall decide whether the Code shall be applied to conduct occurring off campus, on a case by case basis, in his/her sole discretion.”

We recommend that the Code define, explicitly, the sole instances in which the Code may be applied beyond College premises. We believe that our values of health and safety would be best served through explicit descriptions of off-campus situations where enforcement of the Code may benefit the expression of those values.

The Geoduck Union also informed the Student Conduct Code DTF regarding several prohibitions of behavior (Sec iii b) [now iv.2/5] Many of the restrictions threaten the right of students to acts of civil disobedience, which the Union defends as critical for a free society and any learning environment. We recommend the addition of language that explicitly grants students the freedom to engage in civil disobedience and prohibits the existence and/or enforcement of any part or parts of the Code to limit or restrict any student’s right to engage in such activities including but not limited to the inhibition of the school’s ‘means of production.’ Below are specific sections of the proposed Code that are in conflict with our recommendations.

1. Obstruction or disruption of learning, teaching, research, administration, freedom of speech and movement, the adjudicative process, public service functions or College-sponsored activities on or off campus.

5. Failure to comply with directions of College officials or emergency response personnel acting in performance of their duties which includes failure to identify oneself to these persons when requested to do so.

17. Refusal to desist from prohibited conduct.

18. Failure to respond to any notice to appear for a meeting or hearing as part of the student conduct process and failure to comply with an imposed sanction or any agreement made during the adjudicative process.

23. Alleged violation of federal, state or local law and/or conviction of a felony or misdemeanor under circumstances where it is reasonable to conclude that the presence of the person at the College would constitute a danger to health, personal safety, or property or where the offense occurred on College premises or at College-sponsored activities.

24. Failing to intervene with or knowingly assisting another person to violate the Code. The Union also finds the following parts of the Code (from Sec iii b) [now iv.3] in need of revision or deletion due to problem of enforcement or lack of accordance with state or federal law. The Union defends the right of students to refrain from self-incrimination during any College investigation, hearing, or process.

3. Failure to be truthful and forthcoming to the College or a College official. This includes but is not limited to making false charges against another member of the community, providing misinformation in application for admission, to gain employment, or to avoid determination of facts in a College investigation, hearing, or process.

9. Possessing firearms or weapons on campus; unauthorized use, possession or storage of any explosives, dangerous chemicals, or substances; or possession and/or use of any instrument designed to cause harm which threatens or might reasonably cause fear or alarm to others.

The Geoduck Union will continue to aid and engage the Student Conduct Code DTF in its efforts to revise the Code and will continue to make comments during the revision process.