PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER 27 MARCH 2001

LETTER

RESPONSIBILITY FULFILLED

In his letter regarding the student protests at Trent (Examiner March 24), Mike Drynan states, "universities and colleges are the law in what takes place, not the students. If the student doesn't like the conditions and rules of the university they attend, they can apply to another the next term."

These short-sighted comments promote political apathy. First, by arguing that students should not be making "law" with regard to their own education, students are waived of their civic responsibilities. As stakeholders in a public institution - without whom the university could not exist - students not only have a right, but an obligation to participate in decision-making.

Second, Mr. Drynan suggests that rather than confronting problem,
students should simply run away from them. By this logic, those who are opposed to the current dismantling of health care in Canada ought not challenge cutbacks, but should instead move to another country.
Female suffrage, civil rights and independence claims were not gained by people passively accepting the "laws that be" or by packing up and leaving their communities. These achievements were made by people willing to fight for their beliefs - even when it required civil disobedience. Likewise, the students who occupied the offices at Trent University were standing up for their convictions and attempting to fulfill their duties as active and responsible members of society.

John S. Miller
Stewart Street

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER 21 MARCH 2001

LETTERS

CORPORATE MODEL AT TRENT

As retired Orillia teachers with many former students attending Trent
University, we are sorry to hear of the extraordinary measures taken by Ms. Patterson against eight young women protesting Trent corporate decisions.

Obviously now Ms. Patterson's first priority must be to update her
resume. Her days, we predict, at Trent are deservedly numbered.
Trent has for 30 years enjoyed pride of place as Canadians' small liberal arts institution fostering collegial learning in an intimate academic
community. We see no respect for dialogue in sending 25 armed policemen in the middle of the night to shackle eight unarmed young women.

A major contributing factor in abandoning civility for Patterson hubris
may be the widespread institutional adoption of the business corporate model.Were Ms. Patterson better educated, she would know that schools and cities offer more ancient and better corporate models of behaviour than Harris-Ontario big business. The response from Trent's faculty restores faith.

Jack-boots and trampling don't work. Handcuffs and strip search, indeed!

Roger and Patricia Perry
RR2, Orillia

COLLEGES NEVER IN LONG-TERM PLAN

The actions of eight students at Trent University was a breach of law. They are charged with mischief. They should be!

The alleged reason for their unlawful act appears to related entirely to
the decision of the board of governors to close two downtown campuses.

When the university opened originally, they utilized these properties as
well as the former vacant elementary school, South Central. This was a wise stop-gap action to accommodate the small number of the first year students.

Later as construction proceeded at the intended Symons campus, the former school was vacated and sold, as was the intent to sell the other dwellings in due time.

(Editorial Note: Tom Symons himself has said that the downtown colleges WERE always part of the permanent plan, and not simply a temporary holding-ground)

I concur with the brief not of Marion Nunn (Examiner, March 9) and the many letters in support of the action of president Bonnie Patterson.

William D. Johnston
Bridle Crescent

TRENT CHIEF DEFENDS CLOSURES TO DBIA
By BILL HODGINS Examiner Staff Writer

While the Trent community mourns the death of the Jolly Hangman, its demise is bringing new life to the downtown, the university's president says.

Bonnie Patterson made the announcement to the city's Downtown Business Improvement Area board last night, in response to concerns the loss of Catharine Parr Trail1 and Peter Robinson colleges could adversely affect the downtown.

The Jolly Hangman, a small pub on the Peter Robinson campus, was forced to close late last year when the roof fell in, Patterson said.
It's relevant in two ways. For one thing, it demonstrates the maintenance concerns Trent has with some of its older buildings and why they need to be replaced.

Secondly, it shows how the downtown isn't being forgotten. Some of the pubs have been moved to a downtown establishment and the feedback has been positive.

The DBIA recently took a stand on the issue, saying the downtown colleges are valuable components to the city's core and should not face Bonnie Patterson Trent's restructuring axe.

"They are an important part of the downtown community, from an economic point of view and from a cultural point of view. They bring something different to the downtown," DBIA board chairman Steve Winn told The Examiner.

"Whenever you lose something downtown it hurts," Winn said. "The students patronize business downtown...this is the main shopping area for them. In late 1999, more than 100 individual downtown business owners signed a petition opposing the closures, but the DBIA chose not to take a definitive stance on the issue at that time.

Last night, Patterson tried to appeal to the business side of the DBIA to help explain the closures.She said the university will face huge costs in having to increase faculty numbers while still dealing with a deficit. Soon, she said, a balanced budget must be brought in and it won't leave a lot of room for extra spending.

"We can't take an awful lot more out of the university without it
collapsing," she said, estimating 86 per cent of the Trent budget, is spent on people. A further eight per cent goes to awards and scholarships. That leaves just six per cent to run the university, she said.

Even at the main campus, some unexpected but necessary repairs have meant borrowing money while other less urgent maintenance issues have gone untouched.

But the university's presence continues to add millions of dollars to the
local economy, she said. With enrolment expected to rise in coming years, those dollar levels will only increase, she said.

PETERBOROUGH THIS WEEK 21 MARCH 2001

LETTERS

STUDENTS 'CARE DEEPLY': PATTERSON

The following was written in response to a letter from the
parents/step-parents of Sarah Cardiac, Sarah Lamble, Jessica Lyons, Allison Marcovitz, Danielle Markson, Natalie Napier, Karine Rogers and Miti Simmonds-- the Trent University students who occupied a university administrative office Feb. 26 and were subsequently arrested and charged.

To the editor:
I have received your letter of March 10, 2001 expressing concern about police intervention and charges laid in the recent occupation of the offices of the vice-president (Academic) and Dean of Arts and Science in which your daughter was involved.

I appreciate, as a parent, you are deeply concerned for your child's
welfare and your request regarding the police charges has been noted. Your letter-also calls attention to a broader concern about democratic debate within the university.

I would like to begin by explaining some of the reasons why police
intervention was deemed to be required in this case. By the third day of the occupation, the university had become seriously concerned about the health and safety of the students inside the office. The
lack of toilet facilities inside the offices posed a potential health risk to
individuals handling containers of human waste. The absence of an unblocked fire exit and the attaching of chains to wooden ceiling panels were also issues of concern.

Unlike other types of protest and dissent normally engaged in by students at the university, this action was an illegal form of expression which had brought the work of two important university offices and six employees to a standstill. Staff who worked in the offices had been seriously frightened by the actions of the group of approximately 20 men and women who forced them to leave their work areas, and needed assurance they would be able to return to work safely.
As a backdrop, university officials were receiving reports of other
students feeling intimidated when walking by the area outside the occupied offices and phone calls from parents concerned about their own children's safety.

The students occupied the offices for two full days and nights, during
which time they were encouraged by the university to leave the premises voluntarily and without consequences. After two days, in light of the foregoing considerations, senior administration felt it had no option but to seek the assistance of local authorities. At this point, a police representative undertook, for twelve hours, to negotiate a voluntary, peaceful exit. It was made clear to the students their continuing refusal to end the occupation could result in charges being laid by police.The procedures later followed by police in removing the students, the ensuing arrest process and the nature of charges laid were not matters within the university's jurisdiction.

Regarding the fostering of open discussion on university issues, Trent
University has a long tradition of public debate on almost every issue of concern to the university community. There are many legitimate forums in which this dialogue can take place, including dialogue on some of the concerns raised by the occupying students. Occasionally, however, there is an issue on which consensus cannot be reached and, at some point, a decision has to be made. Such was the case with the difficult but necessary financial decision to consolidate Peterborough operations on one campus taken by the board some 18 months ago as part of a plan to ensure the university's future.

Some members of the community whose views were heard and considered, but not acted upon, have had great difficulty accepting this decision. Thank you for this opportunity to provide the administration's perspective on recent events. The university does share your concern for your daughter and the other students involved in the occupation, who we know care deeply about their university.

Bonnie M. Patterson, President and Vice-Chancellor,
Trent University,
Peterborough

BEWARE THE MEDIA SPIN

To the editor:

From Nelson, British Columbia, I write to appeal to your readership to do something, whatever they can, to appeal for a change in Trent University's policy of selling its two downtown colleges.

Your community will suffer if the sales go ahead. If you cannot see the
truth of that, ask around. There are many reasons to say so. Your local economy, and your vibrant cultural life, and the social mixing brought by students, is not to be lightly thrown away. Peterborough, respond. Tell your civic government, business organizations, and so on to make appeals to the board of governors to rethink their course.

By all means, do not let the media spin about "intimidation" and
"militant radicals" and "illegal occupation"-created by spin artists of the
university powers-arouse your feelings of dislike for the young students.

That is an old and tired tactic. The truth is simpler.

Civil disobedience to an illegitimate process is very respectable. It has
been used to good effect for noble goals in history. The eight young women occupiers were not terrorists. Be open-minded, not bigoted, in this question.

Thank you, Peterborough. I know you are listening.

Charles Jeanes,
(BA, history, 1973,
|Champlain College, Trent University),
Nelson,British Columbia

'BRAVE' STUDENTS ADMIRED

To the editor:

Why I am writing this letter? There are many reasons, I guess, but they all stem from the same source that caused me to write initially, namely my emotive and subjective attachment to the same Trent University that drew me to her more than 10 years ago.

The catalyst, however, for this letter comes from the disturbing events
that occurred recently in the vice-president's office, the non-violent
sit-in, the dialogue that ensued and its resolution by unnecessary force.
As is well known, a university environment fosters passions for causes, pleas of the innocent and attachment to place. Trent is no exception to this rule. In fact, I remember my initial research into Trent some 11 years ago. A popular book at the time described Trent as a Northern Berkley. Wow, I thought, this is where I want to go; a place to challenge my preconceptions and my culture at large.

From my initial foray into Trent, I was confronted by issues of
sexuality, aboriginal rights, my own spirituality and faith. Trent was truly my intellect's mater. So it comes as a disappointment to hear the
administration responded to what I believe was the fifth recorded student sit-in with the use of force.

I have to qualify something at this juncture, namely the nature of the
force. The breaking of glass, the use of 25 riot-geared officers and the
subsequent stripsearches should not be the issue. In fact, the Peterborough police should most definitely not be used to shift the focus of the discussion away from the intent of the sit-in nor the failure of successful dialogue. The police performed their duty, that we as a community have empowered them-to do, admirably well and within their outlined procedures. For the administration to attempt to shift any sense of blame besmirches the integrity of the Peterborough police force and, in my opinion, further creates more obstacles to the ongoing conflict within the Trent community at large.

What has gripped me most by the sit-in's intent is obviously that present Trent students, who will soon be alumnus as well, believe, as I do, the college system is integral to what is Trent. It seems to me Trent, in a microcosm, represents present western alienation between a group's and individual's sense of place and sense of community by the evolving mantras of the day-consumerism and corporatism.
There is no doubt Trent has been, and is, in need of financial reform but the manner in which the administration has attempted to bring about the changes, according to the sit-in, have been noninclusive as well as possibly pseudo-legal according to Senate procedures.
When any major changes are required, someone in the end has to make difficult choices, which may not, in fact, be supported at the time. There can be no doubt Professor Patterson has confronted these sentiments, both directly and subtly.

The problem occurs, however, when matters of finance and bottom line overshadow the reality of place, the reality of what is Trent. Trent is its colleges and the colleges are Trent. To remove them from the downtown core removes both the figurative and literal roots that bind Trent to itself.

If the impetus for restructuring demolishes the colleges, it is my belief
Trent will merely devolve into another institution whose intent is not to
prepare a young mind to think and to challenge but rather to budget, forecast and invest.

I tip my hat to those brave students who challenged the silence of
change. I truly hope their actions re-invigorate a new discussion where both sides can express their needs, and hopefully, in a mutual and inclusive manner, heal the wounds that are still fresh. In the end, it is the decision whether Trent survives or not. No colleges have closed yet; no one has been injured, rusticated or placed on probation.

Well, my rhetoric is over. In the final analysis, I will use the language
of corporatism to try to make my sit-in. As I have told Trent Alumni when they have called, as long as it seems the colleges will be dissolved, both my partner and I will withhold contributing to the financial future of Trent.

Without the colleges, I would feel I was donating to the University of
Toronto, a fine institution but in the end an institution, not a place.

Richard Michael Manley-Tannis
(Catherine Parr Traill, 1995),
Peterborough

TRENT OFFICE 'OCCUPATION AND THE RESPONSES IT NECESSITATED ARE REGRETTABLE,'
SAYS BOARD CHAIR

The following was written in response to a letter from the
parents/step-parents of Sarah Cardiac, Sarah Lamble, Jessica Lyons, Allison Marcovitz, Danielle Markson, Natalie Napier, Karine Rogers and Miti Simmonds -- the Trent University students who occupied a university administrative office Feb. 26 and were subsequently arrested and charged.

To the editor:
I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your letter to the Board of Governors of Trent University dated March 10, 2001. I understand President Bonnie Patterson is responding as well to a similar letter sent to her.

I, too, am a parent of a university student and appreciate your concern
for your child. Over the three days to the occupation of Trent's
administrative offices, your daughter and the other seven students were given several opportunities by the administration and by the police to leave voluntarily without penalty.

The nature of the penalty they would face was explained to them. In the end, the young women chose a course of action in full knowledge of the consequences of their decision.

I believe the (university) president was justified in enlisting the
assistance of the police to resolve a situation that was threatening the
health and safety of your daughter and others, and was preventing two
important offices in the institution from functioning.

Your letter urges the board to "rethink what [we] are doing and move into a process which involves democratic dialog.

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER 25 MARCH 2001

LETTER

TRENT BUILDINGS MAY BE LOST

In all the furor over Trent University administration's unfortunate decision to sell Peter Robinson and Catharine Parr Traill Colleges little or nothing has been mentioned about the actual buildings. Anyone who saw CHEX television's coverage of the sudden action last year surely have been impressed by the pictures of these structures.
A recent letter to the editor was headlined "People Matter, not
Buildings". While I would not dispute the assertion that "the quality of an institution depends more upon the excellence of its members than the physical plant in which they are housed," I am really dismayed at the easy dismissal of a major portion of Trent's historic and architectural legacy.

Peterborough has made great strides in recent years in saving, restoring and appreciating the substantial built heritage of its 150 year status as a city; witness the Market Hall, the Morrow Building and many others. The downtown colleges represent major pieces of that valuable infrastructure and most of their components appear to be in considerably better repair than several of their counterparts on the slightly more than 30-year-old Symons campus: how extraordinary that Otonabee College's residence should have to be
demolished after only three decades, not to mention the presumably huge costs of roof renovations in the cafeteria area. Is it really the old buildings that constitute a liability to the university in terms of maintenance? What's wrong with this picture?

Much has been said about the commercial and societal loss to
Peterborough's downtown upon the closing of the downtown campuses, but not a word has been printed about the effect of putting all these buildings on sale. Who, aside from developers looking to make a profit by building warehouses for the elderly, will have the resources or the inclination to purchase any or all of these buildings, few of which will be easily adaptable to non-college users? Is there any safeguard for the historic and architectural integrity of such buildings as Sadlier, Bradburn, Langton and Kerr Houses? I strongly suspect there is no such protection for these beautiful old structures, even to prevent them from demolition. (And will Trent receive full value for property with limited re-use possibilities?) Professor Gallop suggests critics of the university administration's decision should "abandon futile courses of action which can lead to nothing but further trouble." It would seem that most courses of action during the
Harris government's tenure have been futile where education at all levels is concerned. How long will Ontarians continue to stand by, shaking their heads and then obediently complying with things they know to be wrong or destructive? Our institutions of higher learning should have been the first to protest, not just students. Had they done so, perhaps Trent would not be in its present financial crisis.

Bravo to the handful of Trent academics who have had the courage to
resist the temptation of SuperBuild sops for what they really are, bread and circuses and a way to replace the liberal arts emphasis on learning with training for the production of a docile, keyboard punching workforce. Costly investments in technology are steadily eroding the classical education tradition of critical thinking which, ironically, produces more top leaders and higher earners than the technological curriculum.

As for the recent quote from Professor Glassco, "my way or the highway" perfectly describes the attitude of the present provincial government, not that of the idealistic young women who acted out of frustration and, perhaps, a naive belief that right would conquer might. It's time for grownups, and especially academics, to stand up and be counted.

J.P. SCHMIDT
Water Street

ARTHUR
20 MARCH 2001

LETTERS

PTBO RESIDENT ASKS TOUGH QUESTIONS

Could you please clarify a remark in the 27 February 2001 issue in the BoG Briefs article compiled by Hala Zabaneh. She reports Skip Maxwell, Chair of the Build 2000 Committee as stating "SuperBuild does pay for academic space, but if we are looking for residence space, we need to incorporate it." What does 'we need to incorporate it' mean?

Does it mean that the downtown colleges residences will not be re-built on the University campus unless Trent can find a corporate partner? Does it mean that Trent is looking for a corporate partner and has not found one? Is it possible to have a college without an attached residence?

I understand that not only are the downtown colleges being closed but
that the Otonabee College residence is to be demolished and re-built. The university cannot find funds to repair or maintain downtown colleges but there are adequate resources to demolish and rebuild a campus residence. I cannot understand why a 25 year old building requires demolition yet two 100 year old downtown campuses will be attractive to a buyer as is. And I cannot understand how the university can accommodate the anticipated increase in attendance with three college residences closed.

I am sure there must be a logical explanation and someone out there has an answer.

John F Reeves

EDS' NOTE: AND WE'VE GOT (SOME OF) THE ANSWERS…

John, we love readers like you. We asked Build 2000 Chair Skip Maxwell, and College/Residence Life, Social Space and Conference Services Reference Group Chair (whew!) Heather Avery your questions.

To your first question - must Trent have a private partner to re-build
the colleges - Maxwell reaffirmed that Superbuild funding does not pay for residential space. He says there's a "whole gamut" of things that could happen, and that corporate partnership is a possibility. He outlined a few shapes such partnerships could take: (a) a corporate partner who would put some money upfront in return for some concessions from Trent, and who would then lease the space back to Trent. (b) A corporate partner who could have exclusive use of parts of the built facilities during pre-determined times of the year. Again, upfront cash in exchange for concessions. (c) ("And this is not popular with anyone," says Maxwell)-- a partner who would lease a plot of
land from Trent to build a residence on it. "I'm quite sure that's a
non-starter," says Maxwell. (d) Trent could try talking to a financial
institution <read: evil big bank> to get a loan to build the residence, and get it mortgaged.

Your second question: Maxwell says "Trent has had some proposals
presented to it… Trent is now looking at getting some formal feasibility studies done on the full range of possibilities-- from corporate partnership to totally Trent owned and operated, total self-ownership." Avery says her reference group heard a "very strong" preference for a Trent owned and operated residence. Trent is currently selecting a company to perform the feasibility study, she says. "We have to figure out how to fund it and still have summer revenue."

Can Trent have a college without a residence? "It does," Avery
deadpanned, "Julian Blackburn College." As for future developments, Maxwell says that idea has been "floated, but hasn't been pursued very far yet." Perhaps a good reader who serves on the Committee on Colleges could help John and Arthur out here? Maxwell and Avery agreed that your excellent question about monies for construction at some colleges (OC) and none for others (PRC) could be best
answered by our friend Bernie Roth, the director of Physical Resources. We couldn't get ahold of Bernie for you, John, but you could try calling him at 748-1011 ext. 1308. Or, maybe he'll write in, so that all Arthur readers can benefit from seeing his answers in print.
However, Maxwell was willing to venture that there "had been concerns about the stability of some parts of the OC residence" - and he stressed 'residence'. There "had been" a plan to demolish parts of OC< he confirmed. But he also said that Mr. Roth had since looked at OC and was not necessarily convinced that demolition was the answer.Money for OC and not for PRC? Mr. Roth is the man for that answer. Maxwell did mention a "consolidation grant", though. Apparently Trent received almost $600,000 as an incentive to consolidate. This money was included in the May 1999 SuperBuild award. (The province wants universities and colleges to consolidate, for "efficiency" or "responsibility" or "accountability" reason, no doubt.)

"There's a certain logic to consolidation," adds Avery. Since the
administration ahs decided that SuperBuild construction will occur on main campus, not at the downtown colleges, money and effort are going into buildings on Symons Campus. "Therefore buildings on Symons Campus are going to stay, and need to be invested in," says Avery.

The Globe and Mail, Tuesday, March 20, 2001

Trent's unlikable lessons

By William Graham

Toronto -- The dreadful events at Trent University on Feb. 26 have been made even worse by Peter Gzowski's insincere apologetics (The Trouble IsEveryone Loves Trent Too Much -- March 17). Mr. Gzowski, the Trent chancellor, wants to sweep the real issue under the rug with such pap as, "everyone on all sides of the debate is likable" and "acting out of a genuine, deeply felt passion for this unique little university." Intent on backing up a fellow administrator, president Bonnie Patterson, no matter how egregious her decisions, Mr. Gzowski says she "acted with compassion and understanding" and has been "unfairly and personally attacked."

But what of the students? It is a fact that eight young women non-violently occupied the vice-president's office. It is also a fact that police, in full riot gear, acting in the dead of night (3 a.m.), smashed the windows of the office and arrested, handcuffed and strip-searched the women. They were held for 13 hours and charged with a felony offence, not a misdemeanor.

My stepdaughter is a second-year student at Trent who was not involved in the sit-in. As a parent, I am deeply concerned with her education. What are students at Trent to learn from this experience? Never to actively question authority. Never to speak out for or to defend their democratic rights. Never to participate in non-violent protests, so central to democratic societies. Always to suppress truth and conscience in deference to power and authority. What an excellent educational experience the sit-in could have provoked if President Patterson had been concerned more with education than
with power.

Professor emeritus, University of Toronto

Toronto Star March 15th, 2001

NDP wants probe into police actions at Trent U

Officers in riot gear swarmed 8 student protesters and strip searched them

Ontario's NDP leader called for an investigation today into a dramatic arrest at Trent University in which police in riot gear swarmed eight student protesters and strip searched them.

In a letter to the province's solicitor general today, Howard Hampton condemned the March 1 incident as a ''shocking and unnecessary'' use of force against students who were protesting school cuts.

''I am shocked that authorities would find it necessary to deploy 25 police officers in full riot gear to remove eight young women engaging in peaceful civil disobedience, and as such I believe that an investigation is warranted,'' Hampton wrote in a letter addressed to David Turnbull.

Trent professors criticized the police crackdown at a faculty council meeting on Monday and voted to ask administration to drop the mischief charges.

A police decision to strip search seven of the eight women was also criticized by the council, which represents 315 full- and part-time faculty at the school in Peterborough, Ont.

They condemned administration for ''the unprecedented use of force'' used to end the occupation and called for the ''restoration of due process and consultation in university governance.''

Calls to Turnbull's office were not returned.

During the three-day protest, eight women chained themselves together in a university office to protest the closure of downtown colleges and demand a more open decision-making process at the school.

Toronto Star Mar. 13, 2001

Police end Trent student protest, arrest 8

University staff hold special meeting to discuss arrests

PETERBOROUGH, Ont. (CP) - A two-week protest by Trent University students ended yesterday when police dressed in riot gear arrested eight women and charged them with mischief.
About 25 officers swept into the university office, which had been occupied since Feb. 27 by students who were chained together.
A police decision to strip search the women was criticized by faculty, who gathered in response to the administration's decision to call in police.

''We need to talk to each other,'' an emotional John Wadland said during a faculty council meeting. ''We can't yell at each other across this divide.''

''Let the students' efforts, whether we agree with them or not, mean something,'' Wadland said.

The students were protesting the closure of the university's downtown colleges and demanding, among other things, a more open decision-making process at the university.

The faculty council represents 315 full- and part-time faculty. In a secret ballot, members supported a motion requesting the administration send a letter to the court asking that the charges be dropped or reduced.

They also condemned administration for ''the unprecedented use of force'' employed to end the occupation and called for the ''restoration of due process and consultation in university governance.''

President Bonnie Patterson and vice-president academic Graham Taylor were at the meeting. Although eligible to vote, Patterson said the pair didn't because the meeting was called by faculty, not them.
The discussion about ''responsibility'' is the ''best platform'' on which the university can move forward, she said.

''We have to agree to disagree,'' Patterson said. ''We haven't been able to do that as a community.''

Issues raised at the faculty council will be discussed at a senate meeting today and also during meetings with elected students, which were scheduled before the occupation.

The meeting will include a discussion of the transition when Peter Robinson College closes this summer, Patterson said.

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER 14 MARCH 2001

PARENTS BLAST TRENT HEAD

By INGRID NIELSEN
Examiner Staff Writer

The parents of eight Trent University students who occupied an office for three days, sent an angry letter this week to Trent president Bonnie
Patterson.The parents condemn the administration's decision to ask city police to have the women removed and say they are "appalled" at how the university handled the situation.

The letter, signed by 18 parents and step parents, states they are "quite aware of the reasons for the protest" and that "(the women's) dramatic occupation follows the values and strategies of non-violent direct action which has a long and honourable history."

The women were protesting the university's decision to close its two
downtown colleges and the decision-making process at Trent. The occupation, from Feb. 26 to March 1, ended when 25 police officers entered the vice-president academic's office at 3 a.m. and physically removed the women.

All eight have been charged with mischief.

At issue, the parents state, is the arrest and subsequent treatment of
the women. "We believe it was devious to do this under the shadow of night....The charges that have been laid are also excessive," the letter states."Your over-reaction to the protest indicates that you have abandoned the route of open democratic debate in the public forum....We are appalled that, as Trent University's president, you acted through a massive police presence and that you seek to criminalize our daughters rather than honour their courage and tenacity."

Oscar Cole-Arnal, father of protester Sarah Lamble, said yesterday that he contacted the other parents to get support for the letter.
"We find (the women's) actions commendable," Cole-Arnal said from his office at Wilfrid Laurier University in Waterloo. He compared the women to other protesters of the past, including Martin Luther King Jr. and Nellie McClung.

"It is wonderful to be proud (of my daughter) on two levels; for her
courage and savvy, and I share her values," Cole-Arnal said. But he admits he had his "share of daddy concerns" when the protest was taking place.

The letter urges the university administration to "rethink what you are
doing and move into a process which involves democratic dialogue."
Patterson was in Ottawa yesterday at a meeting of the Association of
Universities and Colleges of Canada.

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER 19 MARCH 2001

LETTERS

POLICE ACTED CORRECTLY

I commend the Trent University students who spoke up and demonstrated for issues they feel are important and need serious answers. I do, however, criticize their decision to unlawfully take over the vice-principal's office. President Bonnie Patterson gave them a few days to make their point, but eventually action had to be taken. These adult students were obviously very willing to accept the penalty for their actions and have certainly received a great deal of publicity.

Some letters to the Examiner praised the Peterborough police department for professionally defusing what could have been a volatile situation. Rightly so! Other writers, due to their lack of knowledge and expertise, highly criticized the police actions.

Let's review these complaints:

Why did 25 police officers show up to make arrests? To my knowledge there were eight students barricaded inside the VP's office and 17 supporters outside. According to my math that is 25 demonstrators for 25 police officers. Makes sense to me, unless you expect one officer to control two or more at once. Would the question of police numbers be an issue if the demonstrators were men instead of women?

Why were the police dressed in riot gear and why did they bring a police dog along? Fortunately, Chief McLaren with his experience, realized that peaceful demonstrations can turn violent and took every precaution to protect his officers. The demonstrators knew the police might be coming and high emotions can make people do crazy things. A police dog for crowd control could be an additional asset, especially if more students suddenly appeared in support of
the demonstrators.

Why did the police strip search the eight young women? Contrary to popular belief, violence is not restricted to men. There is a very fine line between sanity and insanity. Prior to the arrests, would any of the police critics be prepared to guarantee that concealed weapons or drugs would not be a possibility?

Why did the police carry out their raid at 3 a.m.? Would you prefer they came to Trent at 3 p.m. so up to 5,000 emotional students might get involved? In that case 200 police officers would not be enough.

Questions that should be asked:

Did this demonstration by 25 students have the support of the majority of Trent students? If yes, I suggest they get better organized and stay within the law.

Was the cost to Peterborough taxpayers for 25 police officers, at other time rates, court time and lawyers, worth the results of this demonstration?

In my opinion, the Peterborough police department handled this situation in a correct, safe and professional manner. The students made their concerns known, no one was hurt and hopefully the verdict will be reprimanded with no criminal records. Critics of our police officers should remember overkill is sometimes safer than underkill for all concerned. If you have never walked in a police officer's shoes, you should keep your criticism to yourself. To criticize means you think you can do better. That I sincerely doubt.

CLAUDE ETTINGER
Sherbrooke Street

SALE OF TRENT NATURE AREA GETS GREEN LIGHT

By Jessie White
News Editor, The Arthur

Trent's Board of Governors has approved the recommendation to
declare university property west of Water Street surplus and eligible for sale and development. This parcel of Trent land, which totals 78 acres, includes the Total Loss Farm Nature Area which along with the other nature areas "serves to maintain ecological and human health of the region," states the Trent University website.

According to the recommendation, made to the BoG on January
19 by the Finance and Property Committee, "A key Board objective for 2000- 2001 is the restoration of financial stability for the University. One specific initiative for meeting this objective is the generation of revenue from the University's endowment lands."

The recommendation further states that because of a shortage
of building lots with Peterborough and the fact the sewer and water lines have been installed along the property line, the parcel of land stands to increase in value. The "University's financial need and current potential for financial gain from property" make sale at this time optimal.

Stephn Bocking, Chair of the President's Advisory Committee
(PEAC), however states that "it was understood that the nature areas would never be sold." Bocking worries that this action may set a precedent with regards to the future of the other nature areas.

PEAC supports the position of the Nature Areas Committee
which has passed a motion stating that if there are to be any proposals for sale of property, there has to be a comprehensive assessment and consultation process. Bocking states that in this case "there wasn't any review of the decision by the wider university community."

The trouble is everyone loves Trent too much

PETER GZOWSKI

Globe And Mail,
Saturday, March 17, 2001

Like all of Trent University, the senior common room at Champlain College is a very pleasant place to be. Generous windows overlook the Otonabee River and light spills onto the scattered armchairs and the stone-and-concrete interior walls.

I spent some time there Tuesday afternoon, first talking to prospective students and their parents (I'm the chancellor of Trent and it was open house) and then just hanging out with one of the many professors I particularly like.

We talked first about the young people -- whatever duties are involved in my largely honorary job are repaid hundredfold by the invigoration I feel from the students.

But then our conversation turned, as virtually all conversations do at Trent nowadays, to the controversy that has divided its lovely campus and that culminated two weeks ago with the arrest -- and strip-search -- of eight young women students who had been occupying the academic vice-president's office.

"Just a minute," my companion said, lowering her voice, and then, before we continued, rose to check behind a wall that separates a kind of reading corner from the rest of the room. "Just wanted to see who might be listening."

Life's been like that all week at Trent: whispered conversations, over-the-shoulder glances, even concerns about who you're seen talking with. It's bizarre -- a bit like Poland in the 1970s, except for two points.

First, so far as I can tell, everyone on all sides of the debate, is likable. Second, everyone, from the most activist of the student sitters-in to the most steadfast of the administration and all the various factions in between, is acting out of a genuine, deeply felt passion for this unique little university in the heartland of Eastern Ontario.

Trent was founded in 1963 as a deliberately small school based on a college system under the guiding and imaginative presidency of T. H. B. Symons, for whom the main campus is named. It was designed by the brilliant architect Ron Thom, who also did Massey College at the University of Toronto.

Despite Trent's short history, this is far from its first political squabble. It has already seen two bitter faculty strikes; the departure, forced or otherwise (depending on whom you listen to), of five presidents; and the growth of a reputation as a hotbed of turmoil.

But it has also attracted teachers and scholars of the first order of excellence, and garnered a record of pioneering and distinction in such areas as the environment, Canadian studies and native affairs. It's not that no one here likes Trent. It's that everyone here -- or so it sometimes seems -- loves it too much.

The issue this time? Ostensibly, the board of governors' decision to close what Trent calls its downtown colleges -- two clusters of older buildings in Peterborough's core named for the writer Catharine Parr Traill and the local pioneer Peter Robinson -- and consolidate everything on the Symons campus.

I say "ostensibly" because the argument has spread to encompass matters of "governance" -- there is a dispute over whether the board has authority to overrule the university senate, whose powers are largely academic; of "corporatization" -- there are paid ads in the student washrooms; and a number of other issues including, now, the fate of the eight young women who took over the vice-president's office on Feb. 26 and were arrested and carted off by Peterborough Lakefield police at 3 o'clock in the morning on March 1.

This last issue is a thorny one, and I have spent a lot of time this week talking to the police, university security, the administration, faculty and a couple of the young women themselves, trying to sort my way through it.

I am convinced that the women tried very hard to act peacefully and properly --although, as one wise letter from a Trent alumna to the Peterborough Examiner said, they "evidently haven't studied Gandhi on the consequences of civil disobedience."

I am equally convinced that the administration has acted with compassion and understanding, and, in the end, in asking the police to remove the young women, did only what had to be done. University president Bonnie Patterson is a decent, fair-but-tough-minded leader who has been unfairly and personally attacked (and deeply wounded) by some of her opponents.

I do, however, also think that the police, while taking pains to appear to behave as reasonably as was possible, stepped far over the line in ordering the strip-searches.

And I am deeply concerned that there are people on the Trent campus who have somehow lumped into a single block the president, the board of governors and even the very significant proportion of faculty and students who understand and support the need to change -- as though Bonnie, as everyone calls the president, had ordered everything up to and including the strip-search.

Ah, me. The week began with driving sleet and freezing rain. But the sun has broken through the past couple of days. The next crop of students has been showing up and at least one of the downtown colleges -- Catharine Parr Traill -- will still be standing when they graduate. People seem to be talking to one another again, even sometimes laughing. Maybe, one of these days, we can all sit down together.

One of the reasons my own affection for Trent has grown so deeply in my brief term as chancellor (I'm just coming up to my third convocation) is how Canadian it is -- right down to its collegial regionalism and its virtually nonstop constitutional wrangling.
Like Canada itself, I think, Trent will muddle through this current crisis. Before it's over, the very thing that's been tearing it apart -- the love its people feel for it -- is going to pull it together.
pgzowski@globeandmail.ca

Chancellor Gzowski:

While I can respect your need to be the "eminence grise" at Trent and
exercise your diplomacy, I would ask that you let your passion for Trent come through a little more! Your judicious comments about the police action were perhaps too tepid. The question that needs to be asked is, "who in the Trent Administration advised the police?" We know that some form of liaison between police and University governors occurs.

Someone told the police to "step over the line" into tactics of force
and humiliation. It was surely not their independent decision to do this, or I am much mistaken in my assessment of how police and civil authority are related. (My father was an OPP officer for 34 years) Please, sir, get to the bottom of this. The consequences of civil disobedience can indeed be harder than young idealists might imagine. But, they assumed this is Canada in the year 2001, not the British Raj in India, 1919. We never had an Amritsar massacre. We can be proud of that. We have our police firmly under our civil control. So when they act to "send a message" or "make an example" by
their use of strip searches, who told them to use such force?
You have some authority at Trent. Can you not use it please, to ask
penetrating questions about this event?

I certainly agree with you about the way the college-sales issue has
grown out of its borders, into bigger issues about governance. Well, there must be a lot of ill-will about the process -- about a lack of sincere listening to alternative ways of making Trent fiscally sustainable -- for such an overflow and such bad feeling to come about.

I have sympathy for the President. She has to communicate why the choice of selling the colleges is the best one. She has not convinced a majority, from all I read and hear. I wonder why. Poor process?

Thank-you for your time and your written remarks about Trent.
I am a graduate, BA,history, 1973.

Charles Jeanes
Nelson, BC

Broadcast by Marginal Books

The students were protesting several issues that have arisen at Trent
University (Peterborough, Ontario) over the past two years. The conflict stems from disagreements between the administration and the staff, faculty and students reagarding the future of the University, specifically two "downtown" colleges that have been slated to be closed by the administration contrary to the directives of the senate and despite constant, unified and public objections of the community, alumni, faculty and students.

The eight young women, aged 18 to 24 had established a non-violent sit-in protest in the office of the Vice-President. They had declared their non-violent intentions and had the support of much of the Trent community.

Trent University has a history of encouraging dissent and political
expression among it's students and although there have been many sit-ins and protests in Trant's past, this is the first time that police have been involved.

Trent administration's president, Bonnie Patterson, at whom the protest was directed, and who made the decision to call the police after only two days of protest, has refused to discuss the board's decisions regarding the future of the University and has repeatedly ignored arguments against the plans for closing the colleges. Board meetings, which have always been open to the public, have been closed. Petitions have been ingnored. Counter-propsals have gone un-read. Bonnie Patterson refuses to speak with the students and faculty who have the most to lose with the board's decision.

Beyond the closing of the colleges, there were several other issues included in the demands of the eight protesters. These demands reflect concerns the students have that the institution providing their education has strayed from it's original stated goals of: a) advancement of learning AND the dissemanation of knowledge; and b) the intellectual, social, moral, and physical development of its members and the betterment of society. And is, instead, being remodelled under the corporate paradigm into a profit generating business in which the students become tools by which the adminsitration can leverage advertising money and government funding in order to fuel the growth of the administration.

If you would like more information or would like to know how you can support the students, go to:
trentaction/
or e-mail them at:
TrentAction@GeekUnity.com

This message was sent by:
Marginal Distribution
277 George Street North, Unit 102
Peterborough, Ontario, K9J 3G9 Canada
phone (705) 745-2326 fax (705) 745-2122

marginal@marginalbook.com
www.marginalbook.com

The Globe and Mail
Wednesday, March 14, 2001

Police overboard

By Matthew MacLean

Toronto -- I was appalled to read about the treatment of student protesters by police at Trent University (Faculty Backs Trent Student Protesters -- March 13). There was no cause for riot gear nor any justification for strip-searching the students.

I am disturbed at the frequency of such incidents. We have never had a satisfactory resolution to issues of Queen's Park's involvement in the Ipperwash protest in 1995, nor of the PMO's involvement in the APEC incident in 1997. We now routinely see riot police on television in trade-related talks worldwide and in homelessness protests at home. Protesters are all branded troublemakers, regardless of the fact that most are simply concerned citizens.

Copyright 2000 | The Globe and Mail

Dear Trent Action:

Faith faith!

We put in a link at http://www.gcpress.com/

all the best,
gk darby

garrett county press USA
http://www.gcpress.com
publisher of Best of Temp Slave!

Media Release, March 7th, 2001

1. A deposit can be made directly to the account at the CIBC branch in downtown Peterborough (Hunter and George Streets).
2. A cheque for deposit to the account can be handed to a teller at any CIBC branch. In this case, the cheque should be sealed in an envelope with the instruction: "Please forward to 00242 for deposit."
3. A cheque can be forwarded to Professor David Sheinin, Trent University, Peterborough ON K9J 7B8 for deposit to the account.

GLOBE AND MAIL TUESDAY MARCH 13, 2001
FACULTY BACKS TRENT STUDENT PROTESTERS
TEACHERS DEPLORE USE OF RIOT POLICE, WANT NO CHARGES AGAINST STRIP SEARCHED WOMEN

The Globe and Mail, Tuesday, March 13, 2001
The big benefits of being small

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER 9 MARCH 2001

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER 9 MARCH 2001 NO ACADEMIC PUNISHMENT FOR TRENT SIT-IN PROTESTERS

DEFENSE FUND SET UP FOR PROTESTERS

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER 3 MARCH 2001
LETTER TO THE EDITOR

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER 3 MARCH 2001
TRENT OCCUPATION WELL HANDLED

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER 3 MARCH 2001
TRENT HEAD BLASTED OVER POLICE RAID

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER 3 MARCH 2001
TRENT OFFICES RESTRICT TO 1 STUDENT AT A TIME

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER 2 MARCH 2001
TRENT HEAD DEFENDS ACTIONS

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER 2 MARCH 2001
TRENT PROTESTERS OUT ON BAIL

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER 2 MARCH 2001
POLICE RAID TRAUMATIZES PROTESTER

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER 2 MARCH 2001
FIGHT TO GO ON, STUDENTS SAY

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER 2 MARCH 2001
STUDENTS SHOCKED BY 3 A.M. RAID

PETERBOROUGH THIS WEEK 2 MARCH 2001
'NOT A DEAD ISSUE'

PETERBOROUGH THIS WEEK 2 MARCH 2001
'IT ALL HAPPENED SO QUICKLY'

Memo to: All Members of the University Community

RE: RESOLUTION OF ILLEGAL STUDENT OCCUPATION

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER 1 MARCH 2001
PROTESTORS TALK TO POLICE

ALUMNI ASKS: IS THE TRENT VISION DEAD?
in Arthur letter to the editor, date not available

It is with dismay that I read of the developments at Trent U, my alma mater. I graduated Trent in 1973. Family and friends in Peterborough keep me informed of Trent news.

The sales of Peter Robinson and Catherine Parr Traill Colleges seems to me a great mistake, and it is unjustified by the purported fiscal
rationale. Professor G. Nader's assessment of September 8, 2000 exposes the hollowness of the financial arguments in favour of a sell-off policy.

No reply to Nader's points has been made, to my knowledge. Why are these sales being promoted as prudent, in the face of Nader's expose? Is the Board of Governors ignoring the Senate's opinion
on the matter, in defiance of - the Trent Act? Why does this seem very plausible to say that privatization of university functions is the
true motive of the supporters of a sell-off policy? Is privatization of Trent U a real long- term objective which is being hidden from the
public?

Here in Nelson BC, I see Trent's developments in ironic light. I sit on a board of a not-for- profit Society whose goal is to restore a
University to this city. Notre Dame U of Nelson (NDU, 1963-78) was in a sense extinguished by the BC Establishment - the monopolistic universities on the Coast and a local College
allied to them. NDU tried to become public, failed (was prevented) and had to close. UBC no doubt was satisfied. Nelson lost a great asset.

You at Trent must appreciate the irony I see. We here desperately want a public university. At Trent, your leaders go the opposite direction. Will a privatized university serve the Trent blueprint and values well?

I recall a Trent U that valued education as a social good, not as a market-driven commodity. The collegiate system modelled on England's, and the two urban colleges (PRC, CPTC) were integral
to a vision of a "Community of Learning". Is that vision dead? The sell-off policy says so.

To close, I plead with the Board of Governors to reconsider the sales. I ask undergraduates at Trent to protest, to challenge the process, and
to educate the public. To my fellow alumni I say, do not donate to Trent if this sell-off and privatization agenda seems a betrayal of an
original vision.

I would like to get this message to an audience of Trent alumni, and I ask the editors of Arthur to do what you can, toward this end.

Sincerely, Charles H. Jeanes
Class of 1973
Faculty of Arts Director,
Nelson University Centre Education Society

Eds' Note: We have forwarded your letter to the
office of Alumni Affairs.

ARTHUR 27 FEBRUARY 2001
VOLUME 35 ISSUE 19

LETTERS

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER
24 FEBRUARY 2001

LETTER

There has been a lot of comment in this newspaper lately regarding the lack of openness of the decision making process at Trent University. The public should be aware that under Canadian law universities are considered autonomous institutions. Although they are funded with tax dollars, the public has no legal right to know how those tax dollars are spent.

I learned this about 10 years ago, when I made some inquiries about the awarding of certain contracts at Trent University. Not being satisfied with the answers I was getting, I called the Information and Privacy Commissioner's office. I was told there was nothing I could do to obtain the answers I sought, because Canadian universities are exempt from the provision of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. Trent University had no legal obligation to tell me anything about contracts it entered into.

If the construction of new facilities on the Symons campus proceeds as planned, millions of dollars of public funds will be used in tendering this work to companies and to individuals. Although Trent University has policies intended to ensure the integrity of the tendering process, the public has no way of knowing or finding out if those policies are being followed. If, for example, Trent University awards a major contract to a certain company, there is no legal requirement for the university to reveal what criteria were used in choosing that company over another. Was it price, quality, service, experience, or was it because the company president has friendly connections with someone on the board? We do not know, and under the law we have no right to know.

This is not to suggest that Trent University is lacking integrity in the use of public funds, but it should be remembered that letters after one's name have never been a guarantee of high ethical standards. Freedom from public scrutiny does not automatically breed corruption, but if those administering these public funds happen to be tempted by the prospect of private gain at public expense, this legally sanctioned secrecy provides an ideal environment for the growth of opportunism, favouritism nepotism, and collusion. Don't ask though, "'cause they ain't tellin'!"

ROBERT EDMONDSON
Walton Street

Peterborough This Week
23 February 2001

COLLEGE CLOSING ISSUE NEEDS `A SENSE OF PROPORTIONPERSPECTIVE': TRENT OFFICIAL

To the editor:

I am troubled by the inflated rhetoric emerging in the public debate over Trent University's downtown colleges.
For example, the recent letter to your newspaper from Tim Piper ("Challenging an institution like Trent University 'takes guts': former student," Feb. 16, 2001) which, at one point, appears to suggest a comparison between the Trent administration and the apartheid regime in South Africa. There really seems to be a need to bring a sense of proportion and perspective to this issue.

Mr. Piper talks about the impact of government spending cuts on health care and social services. But universities as well have experienced years of underfunding, and not just under the current government.

Over the past two years, our administration has been trying to cope with the impact of a more than $4 million reduction in funding. In contrast to some other institutions, we have sought to protect all our academic departments and programs while absorbing these cuts_a difficult task since more than 85 per cent of the university's budget is tied to salaries and benefits.

In the case of the downtown colleges, we are trying to achieve some cost reductions and efficiencies in the management of our physical resources as part of this strategy.

The relocation of the colleges will have no effect on academic programs. No departments are being reduced as a result of these moves; no faculty positions will be eliminated. More than half the faculty currently in the downtown colleges will be moving to larger offices, and all offices and classrooms will be new and better equipped for teaching and research.

The new, relocated colleges will have the same combination of residential and academic activities that found in the other colleges at the Symons campus. Contrary to the rhetoric from some quarters, the college system is not under threat at Trent University.

For those who fear the relocation of the colleges will have a devastating effect on downtown Peterborough, I would point out the two downtown colleges provide residences for a little more than 300 students _less than 10 per cent of Trent's full-time student enrolment, and mostly in their first year of studies. Currently, they take most of their classes at the Symons campus and are on university meal plans, so their patronage of the downtown stores is limited. The other 4,800 Trent students live, for the most part, in and around downtown Peterborough and that will not change. Activities directly related to the Peterborough community, such as the Trent Centre for Community-Based Education and the English department's lecture series at the Peterborough Public Library, will continue. At the same time, the expansion of our teaching capacity the SuperBuild projects are helping to finance will bring between 1,000 and 2,000 more students to live, work (and consume) in Peterborough over the next decade. If we can accomplish this while preserving and adding to the range of academic programs that Trent offers, as our strategy seeks to do, both the university and the wider community should benefit. We are trying to manage the university in a way that's both financially responsible and responsive to the long-term needs of our students, faculty, and the people of Peterborough and Ontario.

Graham D. Taylor, Vice President (Academic), Trent University, Peterborough

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER
17 FEBRUARY 2001

ARCHITECT FIRMS HIRED FOR PLAN'S FIRST PHASE

By Examiner Staff

Two architectural firms were chosen yesterday by Trent University's board of governors to design the institution's new science wing and science complex renovations on the Symons campus.
Shore Tilbe Irwin & Partners and Teeple Architects were selected among 13 firms following a competitive process, a Trent release states.

The board announced its decision at its regular meeting yesterday after making its choice in a closed session prior to the open meeting.
The two companies have worked together on other joint ventures including the Centre for Environment & Information Technology at University of Waterloo and the University of Ottawa's Biology building.

Steven Teeple has also designed Trent's child care centre, which won a 1994 Governor General Award. Stephen Irwin completed the bioscience building renovation and extension at Queen's University.
Trent's new science facilities will be the first part of a master plan to renovate and centralize on the main Symons campus.

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER
17 FEBRUARY 2001

CLOSED MEETING HELD AT SECRET SPOT TO ENSURE SECURITY, PRESIDENT SAYS

By INGRID NIELSEN, Examiner Staff Writer

Trent University's board of governors met yesterday in a closed session in a private dining room, a location undisclosed until after the meeting.

Board chairman Gary Wolff said the board regularly meets for a closed session at the beginning oi its meetings, and then opens the doors for a public session.

But after the previous board meeting, which was disrupted by loud student protests, members chose to hold their closed session in an undisclosed location.

"We didn't quite know what would happen today," Wolff said, adding there is no formal process for deciding the meeting location. It can be decided by either himself or the university administration.
The open part of the meeting was then held in the nearby Great Hall in Champlain College.

Both meetings are usually held in the A.J. Smith Conference Room in the Bata Library. The open session was held in the Great Hall to accommodate more members of the public than can attend in the usual conference room, spokesman Kathleen Bain said Thursday.
Trent president Bonnie Patterson said the location of the closed meeting was not disclosed because they "needed to ensure security."
"The board wanted to deal with business it needed to deal with," she said.

Both Wolff and Patterson criticized The Examiner's description of yesterday's closed meeting in a Friday story as being in a "secret" location.

But they confirmed the meeting was held in a location undisclosed until after the session, and that it was held in a private dining room overlooking the Great Hall.

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER
17 FEBRUARY 2001

TRENT'S $33-MILLION PLAN GETS THE GREEN LIGHT

By INGRID NIELSEN Examiner Staff Writer

Trent University's board of governors approved the master plan yesterday that will set in motion $33 million in renovations and expansion on the main campus.

The motion to accept was put forward by member Len Vernon. Architect Barry Sampson then explained the planning principles of the design, including:

reinforcing Trent's unique environment and identity as a river campus;
integrating academic and residence space in new colleges;
organizing new west bank buildings around a new arrival space.
The master plan includes "a site design and landscape structure for Symons campus. It is conceptual in nature....It provides a long-term framework for the orderly development of new facilities, roadways, parking areas and infrastructure," according to Trent's official documents.

The master plan also calls for the closure of Peter Robinson and Catharine Parr Traill colleges.

It is the closure of the colleges which has drawn the most controversy and protesters were again at yesterday's meeting trying to convince the board to reverse its decision.

About 15 students entered the meeting moments after it started, wearing duct tape across their mouths and carrying signs. One sign read, "Something key is missing in this plan: Two Colleges." They sat ,with other members of the public, separated from the board by a rope.

"Today we have opted to use silence to show our continued dissatisfaction with the current process," student Sarah Lamble said in a presentation to the board. "Our silence however, should not be interpreted as an expression of acquiescence."

Lamble continued to say that the students will escalate their protests, and they "may not be pretty nor polite, things will get messy and it will make some of the members of the university community uncomfortable. "We just want our university back." Prof. John Syrett also addressed the board. He is one of four professors who circulated a "compromise proposal," which calls for not closing the colleges, continuing with the expansion of the science building, a sixth college on Symons campus and a fund-raising campaign involving a "united Trent."

Syrett had previously been told he could not address council. During his presentation, he said the board bares "a great deal of responsibility" for the current financial problems at Trent.
Two students representing Peter Robinson College, Glen MacVichie and Gregory Brophy, also made presentations to the board.
"I want the board to understand that in no way has this been a consultative process. Options have been thrust before us but there hasn't been legitimate interaction with the president and administration," MacVichie said.

He added the majority of Peter Robinson students are in favour of Syrett's "compromise proposal."

Wolff thanked the presenters for their views and said board members will seriously consider what they heard. But? he reaffirmed, the decision to close the colleges is final.

SIDEBAR: Build 2000

Trent University Prof. Skip Maxwell presented an update to the board of governors yesterday on the institution's Build 2000 initiative. It is part of the $33-million renovation and expansion of the main campus:

Science facility: This part of the master plan is in the lead and an architect was chosen by the board yesterday. The project will cost about $17 million and will involve renovations to existing science facilities and construction of a new science wing. Renovations are expected to span two years, starting this spring. Construction of the new wing is expected to take two years and to start in the fall.

t9 First Peoples' House of Learning: This project is not yet as far along as the science facilities, "but preliminary work is nearing completion," a Build 2000 report states. Steps will be taken soon to prepare detail needed to start architect selection procedures. Construction is slated to start spring 2002, and take one year.

Residence facilities: A study is being conducted for details on the feasibility of mixed academic/residential facilities, Trent president Bonnie Patterson said yesterday. Selection of the model or models to pursue and selection of an architect will continue into the fall, with construction slated to start in spring 2002.

Humanities facilities: The university is gathering information on what is needed in the new facilities for humanities and social sciences departments. Planning will continue, with construction of facilities expected to start in spring 2002.

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER
17 FEBRUARY 2001

EDITORIAL

TRENT GOVERNORS -- NO MORE SECRETS

If all it takes to get Trent University's board of governors to abandon the university's own policies on public meetings and the free flow of information is a protest by 40 or so angry students, how serious can its commitment be?

Yesterday, the board held a secret meeting in an undisclosed location.
There is no provision for secret meetings in the board's special resolution on "Open Meetings and the Handling of Confidential Business." Under the board's policies, secret meetings do not exist.
Closed meetings are permitted, under specific circumstances. One of the requirements is that notice of such meetings, indeed all board meetings, be posted.

Notice of yesterday's secret meeting was posted on the Trent website. It included an agenda and a time, but no location.
Trent officials refused to say where the meeting would be held. No one other than the board and any staff or other parties who were let in on the secret could be there.

No student, member of the public, Trent employee or media representative could stand outside the meeting room to determine how long the session lasted, or ask questions when it was over about what actually happened.

We only have the word of university officials that the meeting actually started at 9 a.m. and covered only the topics listed on the agenda.
We do know one scheduled topic was how an "open" board meeting following the secret session was to be handled. That is the most troubling misuse of what is supposed to be a public process of managing the university, a public body funded almost entirely by tax dollars and tuition paid by students.

How can we take seriously anything done in the open session, knowing it was up for debate earlier in secret. Did the secret debate only deal with security procedures, or was a script for the meeting to follow handed out? We don't know, and never will unless a board member breaks ranks. It is not enough that decisions are made in the open. The public should hear the discussion leading to those decisions.
That is why the board's own policies stipulate what can be discussed in closed sessions: contracts, finance, personnel, legal matters, the sale or disposal of property. It also includes business which, if disclosed, might prejudice "the best interests of the university."

Since it is up to the board to decide what might prejudice Trent's "best interests," that section could be used as a catch-all to justify handling almost any item in closed session. Doing so would turn the basic principle of openness and public accountability into a hollow promise, something to be ignored when it is convenient to do so.

Is that the case here? None of the specific closed meeting topics apply. Would public discussion of what is to happen in a public meeting prejudice the best interests of Trent? It is hard to imagine how. But if it would, that argument should be made in public. Have the governors debate the issue of whether closed discussion is necessary, then vote to go into a closed meeting.

That's how a board committed to openness would handle the situation. Not with an edict - which or may not have been discussed by board members, no one at Trent would say - issued in advance that the meeting would be not only closed, but at a secret location.
Trent's board is overreacting to the situation last month when 40 students protested loudly when told there was room for only half of them at a public board meeting.

To its credit, the university did schedule yesterday's meeting in a larger room.

However, it undid that progress by refusing to disclose the location of the earlier closed session, and including the "arrangement for the open session" on the closed meeting agenda. Secrecy breeds suspicion.
Trent is incorporated under specific legislation, The Trent University Act, 1962-63. The act contains only two "objects and purposes" for the university. One of those is "the advancement of learning and the dissemination of knowledge."

Dissemination of knowledge does not apply only to the classroom. Trent's governing body must also be committed to that principle if the university's commitment is to be taken seriously. Holding a secret meeting to avoid having to deal with angry students and using it as a forum to discuss public matters may avoid conflict, but is no way to spread knowledge.

If the board does not want to be open with students, who will pay $21 million in tuition fees this year, and the public, who will supply $23.5 million in government grants, maybe it should consider making Trent a private institution.

Given that more than half Trent's annual revenue comes from tax dollars, that's not realistic. And it is not something we'd like to see.
The board of governors takes its commitment to fiscal responsibility seriously and has done a good job in that area. It must be equally committed to public accountability and openness.

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER
16 FEBRUARY 2001

TRENT BOARD TO MEET IN SECRET
Public body fails to disclose location of closed meeting

By INGRID NIELSEN Examiner Staff Writer

A public body that administers Trent University planned to meet in a secret location today to discuss public business privately.
The board of governors planned to hold the closed portion of their monthly meeting at an "undisclosed location" after student protests disrupted last month's meeting, Trent spokesman Kathleen Bain confirmed yesterday.

"Yes, I would say so," Bain said when asked if the location is not being disclosed because of last month's disruption.
A group of students at Trent are angry with the board's decision to close the university's two downtown colleges, Peter Robinson and Catharine Parr Traill, and relocate all facilities to the main Symons campus.

The agenda for the closed meeting includes the appointment of an architect for the construction/renovation of new science facilities, a part of the university's plans to centralize on the Symons campus.
It also includes the ratification of a collective agreement with Canadian Union of Public Employees Local 3908 Unit 1 and "arrangements for the open session."

When asked how the decision was made to hold the closed session at a secret location, Bain said, "I'm not sure how that was arrived at." It is not known if the decision was voted on by the board.
Trent president Bonnie Patterson did not return a phone call from The Examiner for comment yesterday.

Today's closed meeting will be followed by a 10:30 a.m. open session at the Great Hall in Champlain College, on the main campus. The venue is larger than the one usually used by the board, the A.J. Smith Conference Room.

Bain said the board chose the larger room to be able to accommodate as many people as possible at the open meeting.

The open session is scheduled to include a Symons Campus Master Plan update, a Build 2000 report and a presentation from the college affairs committee, Peter Robinson College Cabinet.

Last month, about 60 Trent students attempted to attend the public portion of a board meeting, but due to room restrictions, only 20 were allowed to stay. The students demanded a new venue be used to accommodate all of them at the open meeting. The board refused.
When the students refused to let the meeting proceed, board chairman Gary Wolff declared the meeting closed and board members attempted to leave for another meeting location. The students then barricaded the exits and attempted to prevent board members from leaving.

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER
15 FEBRUARY 2001

DBIA WANTS COLLEGES SAVED

By JOSEPH KIM Examiner Staff Writer

Catharine Parr Traill and Peter Robinson colleges are valuable components to the city's core and should not face Trent University's restructuring axe, Downtown Business Improvement Area officials said yesterday.

"They are an important part of the downtown community, from an economic point of view and from a cultural point of view. They bring something different to the downtown," DBIA board chairman Steve Winn told The Examiner.

The DBIA decision came during Wednesday's board meeting, marking the first time the 480-member group has taken a side in the ongoing row about the fate of the two colleges.

A letter outlining the DBIA's current concerns will be delivered Friday to Trent.

"Whenever you lose something downtown it hurts," Winn said. "The students patronize business downtown...this is the main shopping area for them."

DBIA general manager Sheila Wood could not estimate the amount Trent students spend in the city's core, but said, "it's a huge spinoff for restaurants and clothiers," Wood said.

In late 1999, more than 100 individual downtown business owners did sign a petition opposing the closures, but the organization chose not to take a definitive stance on the issue at that time, Wood said.
But the new board, sitting for just the second time Wednesday, readily agreed to take a stronger position, Winn said.

"It was a very easy decision," Winn said. "The last board had a lot of other things going on at the time and this didn't really hit the front burner."

While the news could bolster supporters lobbying to maintain the college, Trent president Bonnie Patterson said it will have little effect on the restructuring plan.

"Unless they've got a financial solution for us," said Patterson, when asked if the complexion of debate would change in light of the DBIA's announcement. "In the absence of that, the board must continue to move forward with its plans."

"Several millions of dollars" would be needed to save the colleges, added Patterson, who has faced the brunt of criticism after announcing the closures in late 1999.

Without such cash, Trent's board of governors has Peter Robinson slated for closure this summer, while Catharine Parr Traill is scheduled to close within five years. Trent Prof. Ian McLachlan, who, with Prof. Andrew Wernick, is embroiled in a legal battle with university administration to keep the colleges open, called the DBIA's decision "tremendously heartwarming."

"It's something we've been hoping for because Trent has always had a strong relationship with the community," McLachlan said. "I hope the university's authorities will listen seriously to it because we're all part of the same community. It would be ridiculous not to look at it.
Winn refused to comment about Patterson's remarks, but said the DBIA is not trying to dictate university operations.
"We aren't trying to tell them how to run their business. We're just expressing our concerns about the issue," Winn said.

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER
13 FEBRUARY 2001

LETTER

TRENT REFERENDUM

Trent University President Bonnie Patterson has claimed that 4,700 students agree with plans to consolidate Trent at one north-end campus. She has also stated that a small group of students are responsible for the ongoing opposition to the Capital Development Strategy. However, in re-examining the events of the last two years, such statements seem to glaringly contradict the facts.

600 students protested the initial decision taken by the board of governors, on Nov. 12, 1999, to close the downtown colleges;
1,000 people signed a petition against the closure of the colleges;
the Trent Central Students Association officially opposes the current plans.

More than 40 students were refused entry at the last board of governors meeting because the space provided for the open process was already filled to maximum fire safety capacity. In light of such evidence, it would seem to me that more than a few students have been involved in the protests and that the president may be "scapegoating" certain dedicated activists. I strongly recommend that w e seek clarification on this issue. If Patterson is confident that the majority of the student body supports the Capital Development Strategy then a student referendum should be held. The value of such an initiative would be many-fold and could potentially end the persisting conflict.

If the results reveal that the students support the current plans, than those involved in the protests would certainly acquiesce. And, if Patterson is wrong in assuming that the student body approves of the Capital Development Strategy as it stands, than the revision of those plans can begin. If everyone involved claims to be acting in the interest of a majority, why not find out what the majority really wants?

JESSICA GRILLANDA
Hunter Street West

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER
10 FEBRUARY 2001

LETTER

I thank alumnus Paul Rexe for his column's perspective (Feb. 7, 2001) on Trent's magnificent potential as a community resource, as well as a university that serves a much broader, even international, constituency. I also appreciated his comments recognizing the significant strides which the current university board and administration have made in reversing a bleak financial picture threatening the university's future. I must part ways with him when he portrays our finances as being "in order" and suggests we now, perhaps, can finance "saving" the downtown campuses.

While we have started along the path to financial health, we are by no means yet out of the woods. True with credit to many Trent employees who have helped us achieve cost reductions, we expect to bring in a balanced operating budget for 2000-2001. But that is only the beginning.

Trent's cumulative deficit in its operating budget is still more than $8 million. In addition we have a further half million dollar operating deficit in our college, residence and food services budgets. Our liability in deferred maintenance (repairs deferred year after year) on our buildings, including the Canadian heritage architecture of Ron Thom on the Symons Campus, is especially scary and unacceptable.
We can't ignore that the province's generous SuperBuild grant to Trent of over $28 million comes from a program targeted at building new facilities. The university's case was won in a competitive process and was built on gaining operating savings, eliminating several million dollars in deferred maintenance, and using public funds more effectively through consolidating space and classroom scheduling efficiencies. This source and use of funds allows Trent to construct new physical infrastructure that will contribute to the fiscal health of the university, provide access to modern technology in purpose built facilities, and reduce liabilities for many more years to come. In short, Trent's physical plant of aging facilities has become larger and costlier than the university can afford in today's funding regime. I am also reminded often that Trent is under resourced in many other areas - the library and student aid come to mind quickly.

So I appreciate your words of support, Paul, and I share your earnest desire that this institution thrive for the many generations of students who follow you early graduates in choosing Trent. While progress is being made, there is still much to be done and difficult decisions to make. Trent will continue to have a very strong and positive presence in the Peterborough community long after the relocation of the town colleges. My commitment is to do our best to sustain the core attributes of our learning environment - smaller class sizes, intensive student/faculty interaction, our array of academic programs, research at the highest levels, and yes, our college system. Trent will remain a community resource.

BONNIE PATTERSON
President
Trent University

PETERBOROUGH THIS WEEK
9 FEBRUARY 2001

LETTER

TRENT UNIVERSITY STUDENTS' ACTIONS AIMED AT ADMINISTRATION, NOT THE SCHOOL COMMUNITY

The following was written as an open letter to the Trent University community.

To the editor:

As students who successfully shut down a recent Board of Governors meeting and who disrupted the Trent-Fleming Information Commons Celebration, a number of us wish to communicate the rationale behind our actions and future tactics.

We also hope to make it clear our strategies target the Trent administration and not staff, faculty or other students.
For two years now, students, faculty, staff and community members have challenged the current administration's agenda to consolidate Trent and have demanded university governance function with openness, accountability and broad-based participation.
Many strategies have been used in this struggle and yet the administration has continually ignored our concerns.

First, when the Senate voted against the closure of the downtown colleges last fall, President Bonnie Patterson disregarded this democratic process and took her consolidation plans to the board.
Then, despite the Senate's vote; despite a petition with more than 1,000 student signatures; despite a letter of objection from the founders of Trent; and despite a crowd of 600 students gathered in protest, the Board of Governors still ignored the wishes of a major sector of the Trent community.

Continuing in protest, students, staff, faculty and alumni have written letters, participated in so-called "open forums," attended meetings with the board and the president, and expressed dissent through such actions as Tent City. Most recently, more than 100 faculty signed a compromise proposal which was then endorsed by faculty council. This proposal was also rejected by the president and the board.
Although these actions have been successful in communicating our dissent, they have had little effect on administrative decisions.
The president and company have repeatedly refused to address our concerns in any meaningful way. They aren't even willing to consider a compromise. As students were told on by vice-president Graham Taylor, the administration feels "there is nothing to negotiate."
It is for these reasons we have chosen to engage in disruptive tactics. We believe the only way to ensure our concerns are addressed is to effectively stop the administration from furthering its plans. We realize, however, in the process of these actions, some people may be affected in ways which we did not intend. We therefore wish to emphasize our strategies target the president, her administration and the Board of Governors, not other members of .the Trent community. We also underline it is the administration which has driven us to such tactics.

Finally, we call on all members of the Trent community to act in whatever ways they are able to challenge the administration's mismanagement of the university.

We acknowledge not everyone is comfortable with our tactics but you don't have to approve of our strategies to share our concerns.
There is room for all types of protest. We urge everyone to find ways to participate in resolving the current crisis.

Adam Bobbette, Sarah Lamble, Natalie Napier, Niiti Simmonds, Anup Grewal, Isabel Macdonald, Karine Rogers, Tanya Roberts-Davis, Melissa Hood, Danielle Markson, Ali Sauer, Dave Tough, Sarah Klein and Leslie Menagh, Peterborough

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER
7 FEBRUARY 2001

COLUMN

REXE APPEAL

BY PAUL REXE

A "Founders Day Celebration" was quickly organized by college head George Nader and the Peter Robinson College cabinet for late January. As one of the original 105 students to attend Trent in 1964, I confess to having some deeply held feelings towards Trent and Peter Robinson College.

Partly because of timing, and partly because the college didn't seem to have access to the alumni files, only two of the original students, Dr. John Hucks and myself, were among the many past and present staff, faculty and students who showed up. That was too bad, since many alumni from that first year live and work in the Peterborough area.
Reproduced for those in attendance was a news release from Jan. 25, 1964. It began: "President T.H.B. Symons of Trent University announced today the establishment of two residential colleges in the City of Peterborough, both of them to open in September 1964, for members of the University's first undergraduate class. The University, he said, had purchased two large homes, one at 751 George Street, the other at 300 London Street, which would become the first colleges of the University."

For those who are recent residents, and those who may be too young to remember, it is important to reflect on how and why Trent came about. Trent is the community's university. It has been so from the very beginning. As I looked through the booklet of the "Official Opening Ceremonies" that was on display at the Founders Day event, I remembered the contributions of local citizens in founding the university. People like C.B. Neal, H.F. Waddell, P.J. LaBranche, E.C. Braund, W.M. Comstock, W.H. Mortlock, W.G. Ward, J.G. Wharry, R. Hancox, C.R. LaBranche, W. Rewegan, Colonel Jack Dewart and many more were recognized.

The address by board chairman C.K. Fraser at the opening ceremonies noted, "It takes money to create bricks and mortar. But it takes more than bricks and mortar to create a university. It takes the devoted and careful efforts of the academic and administrative staff." Those words have as much relevance today as they did then.
T.H.B. Symons, Trent's first president, had this to say at the official opening: "Trent University is in a special sense related to the community in which it is located - to Peterborough, to the Valley of the Trent, and to Eastern Ontario. No new university has received a greater measure of support from its home community..."

During his address in front of the once condemned South Central School, refurbished into Rubidge Hall, Symons went on to say, "The magnificent permanent site of Trent University will also be a factor shaping its character in the years to come. This campus, comprising as it does some 1,500 acres of rolling and forested land, straddling the historic Otonabee River for nearly two miles, and on the very edge of the Canadian Shield, is surely one of the loveliest of any university in the world; and it holds open for the university the doors of opportunity to an exciting and unlimited future."

It was very clear from the beginning, that Trent had a community interest and it also had a vision for its permanent campus. That brought me back to the January 1964 press release. "The 'great divide' among university students at Canadian universities tends to be between those who live at home and commute daily, and those who live in university residences and who can thus be full-time members of the university community. The college system at Trent University is designed to eliminate this barrier, and to engage students who live at home fully in the life of the University. Each one of them will be a member of a college, and will have the same privileges, and the use of the same facilities, as every resident student, said the President."
As one student who probably never would have attended university if Trent had not been built in Peterborough, I appreciated being able to use the Peter Robinson College facilities over the course of 30 years, both as an undergraduate and as a graduate student living at home.
The bitterness of some of the current debate lacks the civility that: marked the first years of Trent There is no question that in 2001, Trent needs someone like current president Bonnie Patterson. Funds for scholarships and bursaries to students have increased significantly from less than $1 million in 1996 to more than $3.5 million in 2000 and Patterson expects to bring a balanced operating budget to the board in 2001-2002. But the dispute over the downtown colleges is threatening "the devoted efforts of the academic and administrative staff."

Now that Patterson and the administration have the finances in order, is it possible for Trent to maintain a presence in the heart of the Peterborough? Is it possible to save Peter Robinson and Catherine Parr Trail Colleges?

Paul Rexe is a retired teacher and former city politician writing on various local issues.

Peterborough Examiner Editorial:

BAD DECISION BY BOARD: TRENT CLOSES UP
Tuesday, January 23, 2001.

A commitment to open, public discussion
| of its business should be one of the foundations
of Trent University.

And not just because Trent is a public
institution which receives more than $20 million
a year in tax dollars.

Universities have traditionally been a
stronghold of free speech and open discussion.
They have tolerated, even embraced, dissent and
dissenters, setting an example for the rest of
society.

Last Friday's performance by Trent's board of
governors shows its commitment is no stronger
than a house of straw, blown over by the chants
of 40 protesters.

The protesters were among a group of 60 students
and faculty members who wanted to attend
Friday's monthly board meeting. They expected to
hear Prof. John Syrett present an alternative to
the planned closing of Peter Robinson College
this summer.

Instead, the board refused to hear Syrett. The
group was then told fire regulations would allow
only 20 of them in the board room. University
officials said no space large enough to hold all
60 could be found. Would the same ruling have
been made if 21 students showed up to make a
donation to the university? It is beyond belief
that no lecture hall, common room, even
gymnasium or foyer space was available. Moving
the meeting would have been inconvenient, but
not impossible.

When students inside the board room promised
they would disrupt any attempt to hold a meeting
unless all the protesters were allowed in,
chairman Gary Wolff angrily declared the meeting
closed to the public.

Ideally, the students would have offered some
compromise solution. But they didn't, and Wolff
overstepped his authority by arbitrarily making
a decision which should have been put to a vote
of the full board.

The majority of board members made things worse
by taking part in a secret board meeting in
president Bonnie Patterson's office. Standard
practise for public boards requires a vote to
approve the discussion of public business in a
closed session. That was not done. The
protesters were not told the meeting was taking
place. Neither was a reporter from The Examiner
who was there to cover the meeting.

Yes, the board has stated and restated its
determination to push ahead. Yes, Trent is in a
financial crisis and the large majority of
students and faculty appear to have accepted
that the downtown campuses are too costly to
preserve

But even taken together those do not justify the
board's refusal to hear Syrett's proposal, or to
accommodate students who have every right to
attend a public meeting.

The student protesters won't win much sympathy
by being loud and disruptive but the principle
of public accountability should be able to
withstand a bit of shouting and sign waving.

Imagine what would happen if members of a
neighbourhood group overflowed the city council
chamber and the mayor reacted by declaring the
meeting closed and taking council to her office
to discuss city business in private.

What happened at Trent on Friday is no different
and should be treated just as seriously.

Two years ago, Patterson told Trent students
"there are fewer and fewer items being discussed
in private and we are trying to be as
transparent as we can."

What became transparent on Friday was that
Trent's commitment to that ideal is symbolic,
and its symbol is a house of straw, not a stone
foundation.

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER
20/01/01

BOARD MEETING GOES AHEAD
By INGRID NIELSEN Examiner Staff Writer

Trent University's board of governors managed to
hold a scaled-down meeting yesterday after about
60 protesting students derailed the original
open session.

The meeting ended up being held in president
Bonnie Patterson's office after students
disrupted the meeting held in A.J.M. Smith
Conference Room. They demanded a larger venue be
found to accommodate all of the students who
wanted to participate. Officials refused.

The session held in Patterson's office was
described as "open" by Trent officials yet it
was not accessible to the public. Reporters were
also not informed the meeting was occurring in
the office until it had concluded.

Kathleen Bain, spokesman for the university and
present at the earlier meeting, said she also
didn't know a relocated meeting was occurring at
the time.

Several board members were also not included in
the relocated meeting. They were not able to get
through the student protesters, who were
blocking exits from the foyer outside the Smith
room, Patterson said.

"There was no (board) vote to close (the
meeting)," Bain said. "But circumstances of
having a situation with a potential concern for
student safety and the safety of board members
and staff, prevented...conducting the meeting in
a more public and accessible (location)."

The board "attempted to present options in the
Smith room and give students the opportunity to
be present," she said.

The relocated meeting occurred as students
yelled and chanted, demanding that the two
downtown colleges not be closed and that
students be involved in decisions involving the
current capital development strategy.

Several students linked arms and resisted
attempts by security officers to clear the exits
from the foyer outside the Smith room. All of
the board members were briefly trapped in the
foyer until a few, including Patterson, managed
to break through to Patterson's office.

It was a very disruptive situation which
occurred, and different people were prevented
from moving easily among (locations)," Bain said.

Students were furious first at the refusal to
move the meeting to a larger venue, and then the
board's refusal to allow any students into the
relocated session.

"This is very symbolic of what the board has
done in the past, shutting us out of the
process," said Trent student Yolanda Jones.

Board members insisted there were no larger
venues available for yesterday's meeting. They
also refused to admit more than 20 students to
the Smith room, citing fire code regulations
which restrict room capacity to 59 people.

Despite the absence of several board members at
the relocated session, Patterson said the board
had a quorum, which means there was at least 11
board members present.

She said that enabled the board "to do work of a
time-sensitive nature."

Patterson said topics discussed at the relocated
meeting included:
¥ an executive committee action approval of
request-for-approval for a Sciences (building)
architect;
¥ Trent University foundation;
¥ terms of reference, investment and audit
committee;
¥ investment policy update;
¥ pension plans.

Issues on the original agenda which were not
addressed at the relocated meeting included a
Build 2000 update, the Symons Campus Master Plan
update and policy on appointment of members of
the board, Patterson said after the meeting.

Those items will be on the agenda for the next
board meeting in February, she said.

PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER:
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Janurayr 26, 2001.

TRENT DEMOCRACY A SHAM

I was heartened to see your editorial (Examiner,
Jan. 23) which criticizes the window-dressing by
Trent's board of governors as a sham. You should
also have noted the underlying problem: the
democracy is a sham as well.

You misrepresent Trent views on the matter in
question. In November 1999, faculty and student
senators rejected any relocation of or net
reduction of facilities at any college. In
December 2000, the faculty council approved a
compromise which will defer the moves opposed by
senate for several years. These votes are the
only safe guide, for an editor writing about
openness, to what Trent's faculty and students
think about the college closures. When you claim
that "the large majority" appear to have
accepted them, you forget those votes and you
forget a basic democratic principle: those who
don't vote are happy with the will of the voting
majority.

Unfortunately at Trent we no longer operate
under democratic rules. For example in April
1999 Trent's board of governors approved a
policy under which no board member may express
dissent from the outcome of a board vote. I am
not sure whether this policy has been used yet,
but it means that although the board is dressed
up to look like a parliament it is actually a
cabinet or even a cabal. It also fits very well
with a new rule introduced by Trent's president
in November 1999: we now hold votes first, and
debates afterwards; in addition, votes may be
ignored when they do not suit those in authority.

The students would not need to be "loud and
disruptive" if Trent were an open university.
Your campaign for openness deserves firm
support. Don't let it become a campaign for
better window dressing.

GRAHAM COGLEY
Professor
Laurel Circle

PETERBOROUGH THIS WEEK
31 JANUARY 2001

LETTER

NOT ALL TRENT UNIVERSITY STUDENTS OPPOSE PRESIDENT BONNIE PATTERSON'S PLANS FOR CHANGE

To the editor:

I am a Trent University student, although at the moment I am not as proud to say that as I was when I first started my university career in Peterborough. But my reasons differ from the other Trent students that we have recently seen portrayed on television and in the local papers.
I am a student who feels that her views have been overlooked, but not by our President or her administration, but instead by a small group of students attending this university. This group of students chooses to protest and disrupt university meetings and events under the premise that their views and voices are being overlooked, ignored or oppressed.

Personally I find this odd considering their voices are the only ones that I have heard in the past year. I also find their actions deplorable and, quite honestly, embarrassing. Their appalling behaviour on Jan. 19 has likely coloured the way the Peterborough community views Trent students. I am writing this letter in order that the full picture is seen, that not ALL Trent students feel this way about the current vision being promoted for the university.

This relatively small group of students does not represent the views of the entire student body at Trent University. While we have seen a couple stray letters of support from faculty in the local newspapers, I don't think that we have seen any from students, whether this is because of apathy or fear I really can't say. The recent events at this university have forced me out of my own apathetic hole to write this letter in order to attempt to make sure that the Peterborough community, and perhaps the President herself, realizes that not all students are so violently opposed to the plans being put forth by the administration.

There are students at Trent who support President Patterson and the changes that she and her administration have proposed. On a personal note I also must say that I admire the way she has conducted herself recently, the grace and dignity with which she has handled herself in the face of personal attacks and poor behaviour on the part of a small section of the university community.

I hope that other students and staff and faculty come forward as well with their shows of support so that the Peterborough community, as well as the Trent community see that it does exist.

Jennifer Brown

PETERBOROUGH THIS WEEK
31 JANUARY 2001

TRENT PETITION CALLS FOR BYE BYE BONNIE
BUT PRESIDENT SAYS SHE'S NOT GOING ANYWHERE

Lois Tuffin

The battle at Trent University is getting personal.
A small group of students is circulating posters giving five reasons why Trent president Bonnie Patterson should resign. They blame her for the changes that will close Peter Robinson and Catharine Parr Traill colleges in the next five years.

The protesters have produced a six-part series of brightly coloured posters. One lists five reasons why Ms Patterson should resign and the others give more details on each point.

Her opponents paint Ms Patterson as a deceitful person who doesn't listen to or respect students. They say she doesn't follow a fair, open, democratic process and has a plan that destroys the university.
Ms Patterson says she will not quit or change course.

"I will make the tough decisions it takes to get Trent into a strong financial institution, even if they're unpopular," she says.

She adds 4,700 other students agree with the plans to consolidate Trent to one north-end campus.

To cope with the opposition, Ms Patterson says she reflects on the progress Trent has made since she took over as president in July, 1998. In the past 18 months alone, she and other administrators have whittled the university's debt down to $1.3 million from $9 million. She hopes to balance the books by April.

Her contract with Trent runs until July 1, 2004.
"Looking at Trent's history, it's not uncommon to see certain groups ask for the president's resignation," Ms Patterson says.
From 1984 to 1997, 19 people rotated through five senior management positions at Trent. In a 1997 external review, consultants noted, "Trent's attitude to its presidents alternates between ancestor worship and cannibalism."

Ms Patterson's appointment marked a shift in leadership to a more business-oriented approach, replacing the tradition of hiring a faculty member to lead the university. Conflict with faculty led to former president Prof. Leonard Connolly leaving the job.

"That will not be the outcome in my case," Ms Patterson says.
Jean McDonald, one of the poster campaign organizers, says she is letting people know what the president has been doing, in hopes of proving she's "not a prime candidate" to run a university. She presented a cow spine to the board of governors on Jan. 19, telling them to get a backbone to stand up to Ms Patterson.

Ms McGregor says Ms Patterson doesn't have a strong commitment to Trent. She quotes the president as saying she will quit if the downtown colleges don't close as planned. She says Ms Patterson will move on with "a nice notch on her resume."