What Separates Free Expression and Disruption on Campus?AS Senate Meeting Opens Discussion on Proposed Facilities Use PolicyBy: Erin Hawkins Editor-in-Chief Newsehawkins@csumb.edu

When the educational focus of a college university competes with free expression and the marketplace of ideas, it calls for an open discussion between all members of an academic society.

The proposed Facilities Use Policy, which “establishes the appropriate use of campus buildings and grounds, collectively referred to as ‘facilities’ ” dominated the Associated Students (AS) Senate Meeting on April 7, as concerned students, faculty, and alumni expressed their opinions on the policy.

Several students’ main concern was section 5.0 of the policy, which addresses certain “unacceptable forms of expression and conduct.”

These forms of expression and conduct include, “any activity that prevents students and other members of the University Community from attending classes, completing course work, attending or experiencing a campus event or activity, or conducting University-related business” which could result in a misdemeanor if students violate these codes of conduct.

This section includes prohibited activities such as blockades of entrances, sit-ins, close order picketing, or placing of people and objects that makes it hazardous or impossible to pass by.

The policy also prohibits activities involving disruptive sounds, such as chanting, singing, clapping, or stomping that interfere with academic instruction.

Dr. Christine Erickson, Assistant Vice President for Student Affairs and Dean of Students, communicated to students that the main focus of this policy is to ensure the educational mission of the university while protecting students.

AS President, Brett Roberts, also maintained that the main goal of this policy was education, and that the provisions need to be somewhat transparent in order to cover all the bases for understanding.

Erickson explained that many of the provisions are taken from state law, and designed to protect campus groups and organizations from outside groups who might try and use campus facilities for their own devices.

While the intent of this policy might be to protect students, several students voiced that this policy does the opposite.

Charity Hawkins, HCOM senior, spoke out during the discussion and said, “students are the underserved population” and that sometimes you have to “go against the status quo to get your voices heard.”

Other students also shared this sentiment, including AS Vice President, Ian Olden, and brought to attention that some protests and sit-ins are meant to be disruptive to get a point across and be heard, as several demonstrations in the past have accomplished.

Erickson and Carl Ferguson, Academic Senate Chair, told students they were open to suggestions regarding how to better clarify the policy provisions regarding disruptive behavior.

They also assured students that the Cal State University Monterey Bay campus as a whole is a free speech zone, and that forms of expression would only be put to an end if the actions were deemed disruptive.

However, students still voiced concern over their right to free speech, such as Jacquelyn Gallardo, HCOM senior.

During the meeting, Gallardo stated she did not understand how the university could adopt a policy that limits the rights of the First Amendment, and then charge students with a misdemeanor if the policy is violated.

Tim Bills, the Director of Student Activities and Leadership Development, believes there should be “interventions that are instructive.”

Bills suggested that misdemeanors might not be the best course of action for policy violations, and instead students should be educated on the consequences that might follow.

While the AS Senate Meeting proved to be a successful discussion between members of the AS and Academic Senate and students, faculty, and alumni, the policy will come before the Academic Senate Monday, April 14.

There, members of the academic senate will discuss the provisions of this policy and decide whether the policy will be implemented or postponed for further deliberation.

Word Count: 609