- ' JOC .. "-. - -
STEVENSON LIBRE ' -
UT'CSC,,s first student-controlled, non-bureaucratic newspaper
Year 2, Issue 28
(This issue edited by Tom Schaefer and Marc Norton)
' - ' ' ' - - -- '
* ' ■$*' fOB.
.(
. '■"'•!
SLAM!1 BANG!'... FIZZLE..,
hy Tom Schcerer-
As a sequel to the Llbre's "Slam!' Bang 1'-..Food Issue," (No,
21), the special committee of the Stevenson. Student Council
'(investigating the food contract) summarily followed up their
recommendation for a Student Board with the right to inspect,
evaluate, make regulations and terminate the food contract.
-The Committee had gained the official support, of. the Stevenson
Student Council prior to the publication of the Libre's Food.
Issue, but set out after publication &XX%ffi£XgMXXXXXI2-gg:
XXXXXX to obtain more,endorsement. The Inter-College Board
(ICB), the only student legislative organ embodying university-
wide representation (two students from each college), was
approached and unanimously pledged Its support for the Student.
Board proposal. At the regular meeting of the Executive
Committee of Stevenson College (which Is essentially an advisory
board for the Provost, with faculty and, in a matter of speaking,
student representation), the proposal for a Student Board was
presented by student David Prindle, and procured the
"commendation" of the Executive Committee, who forwarded a
letter to the Chancellor and Harold Hyde, Vice Chancellor of
Business and Finance.
Then the Committee arranged a joint appointment with Harold
Hyde and Howard Shontz, Vice Chancellor of.Student Services,
What transpired at this meeting on Thursday, February 6, 19 6.9,
serves as a classic model of an In loco Pjrentl^ bureaucratic
goose chase. Harold Hyde valiantly proclaimed that,since the
food contract Is between the food service and the Regents of
the University of California, he could not yield any |£XXXX
responsibility -(i.e., power to allow the students a decisionmaking voice in their food contract) to those same students,
asking for a Student Board. He did, however, assure us that the
Administration was deeply concerned about student consultation
regarding the food contract.
Wow.
..
----- . '..
-
' - ■ "V . ' '
University of California, Santa Cruz. McHenry Library, Special Collections. 1156 High Street. Santa Cruz, CA, 95064. (831) 459-2547. speccoll@library.ucsc.edu
University of California, Santa Cruz. McHenry Library, Special Collections. 1156 High Street. Santa Cruz, CA, 95064. (831) 459-2547. speccoll@library.ucsc.edu
- ' JOC .. "-. - -
STEVENSON LIBRE ' -
UT'CSC,,s first student-controlled, non-bureaucratic newspaper
Year 2, Issue 28
(This issue edited by Tom Schaefer and Marc Norton)
' - ' ' ' - - -- '
* ' ■$*' fOB.
.(
. '■"'•!
SLAM!1 BANG!'... FIZZLE..,
hy Tom Schcerer-
As a sequel to the Llbre's "Slam!' Bang 1'-..Food Issue," (No,
21), the special committee of the Stevenson. Student Council
'(investigating the food contract) summarily followed up their
recommendation for a Student Board with the right to inspect,
evaluate, make regulations and terminate the food contract.
-The Committee had gained the official support, of. the Stevenson
Student Council prior to the publication of the Libre's Food.
Issue, but set out after publication &XX%ffi£XgMXXXXXI2-gg:
XXXXXX to obtain more,endorsement. The Inter-College Board
(ICB), the only student legislative organ embodying university-
wide representation (two students from each college), was
approached and unanimously pledged Its support for the Student.
Board proposal. At the regular meeting of the Executive
Committee of Stevenson College (which Is essentially an advisory
board for the Provost, with faculty and, in a matter of speaking,
student representation), the proposal for a Student Board was
presented by student David Prindle, and procured the
"commendation" of the Executive Committee, who forwarded a
letter to the Chancellor and Harold Hyde, Vice Chancellor of
Business and Finance.
Then the Committee arranged a joint appointment with Harold
Hyde and Howard Shontz, Vice Chancellor of.Student Services,
What transpired at this meeting on Thursday, February 6, 19 6.9,
serves as a classic model of an In loco Pjrentl^ bureaucratic
goose chase. Harold Hyde valiantly proclaimed that,since the
food contract Is between the food service and the Regents of
the University of California, he could not yield any |£XXXX
responsibility -(i.e., power to allow the students a decisionmaking voice in their food contract) to those same students,
asking for a Student Board. He did, however, assure us that the
Administration was deeply concerned about student consultation
regarding the food contract.
Wow.
..
----- . '..
-
' - ■ "V . ' '
