By Colleen Harrington
Still reeling from President Stanley’s gut-punch announcement that the sustainability-centered Southampton campus will be mothballed to cut costs, outraged students are preparing to combat SUNY in court. Student leaders announced Friday night that they have raised over $20,000 in under a week to hire a law firm and challenge the closure.
After media reports leaked news of the closure last week, Stanley was forced to announce his intentions to shut down all Southampton residence halls, most undergraduate academic programs and most buildings, including a newly completed state-of-the-art library. Stanley said that closing the school will save $6.7 million annually, and the savings will help offset the nearly $55 million in cuts Stony Brook has absorbed from the state since 2008. The graduate writing program and some marine science classes will continue, but students in all other programs will be forced to transfer to main campus in the fall, where housing and attendance is already perennially packed, or to find a new school altogether.
“President Stanley needs to realize the message he’s sending by closing one of the only schools in the country that’s focused solely on environmental sustainability,” said sophomore Carly Rorer, who moved to Long Island from Kentucky to attend Southampton after finding the campus online. “He’s saying that money and quick fixes are more important than our environment. Saving a couple million dollars rather than saving the planet seems unfathomable to me.”
The initial shockwave of the closure gave way to fierce determination to prevent it. Student leaders set up a “Save the Southampton Campus” Facebook page, which currently has over 17,000 fans. They’ve used this page and a Twitter account to solicit PayPal donations to fund their lawsuit through their non-profit organization, Save the Campus at Southampton, Inc. An anonymous donor pledged an additional $10,000 after the students secured $10,000 on their own by Friday, a huge feat for the resolute students. The money will be used to hire “one of the top law firms in the country,” which will work at discount for legal services, according to the Facebook page. Students are planning benefit events to raise more money, and they have also started an online petition against the closure, which currently has 3,800 signatures.
Local legislators are exploring legal action against Stanley and SUNY as well. First District Assemblyman Fred Thiele and Senator Kenneth LaValle have asked state Attorney General and Comptrollers offices to investigate the closure. The politicians complained the decision was made “unilaterally and behind closed doors,” and without any input from students, community members, or state legislators.
“At this point, legal action is very likely,” said Thiele in a telephone interview. “It will probably be a taxpayer lawsuit for the waste of public assets. They’ve spent $78 million in taxpayer dollars buying and renovating this campus, which they are now throwing away by mothballing it.” Thiele, who likened closure of the 4-year-old campus to “killing the baby while it’s still in the crib,” argued that Stanley’s math doesn’t compute. “I believe that their numbers of saving $6.7 million per year are erroneous and will not stand up to scrutiny,” he said.
University administrators stand by their decision and their reasoning. “Anticipated base savings from closing the residential campus at Southampton are projected to be $6.7 million,” said Daniel Melucci, Stony Brook’s associate vice president of strategy and planning. “Because we expect to honor existing contractual commitments to employees, the realization of those savings will phase in over a 2 to 3 year period.” Melucci says that the 500 students enrolled at Southampton are simply more expensive than main campus students. “When one averages the cost of operating the [Southampton] campus over such a small number, the cost per student is 2.5 times greater than at Stony Brook,” he said.
Thiele asserted a self-serving agenda rather than financial issues are behind the decision. “I think the real reason behind this move is that there has been a not-so-subtle change in philosophy within the administration,” he said. “Shirley Strum Kenny had a broader view of public education, she looked to expand and to serve the broadest possible needs of the public. Stanley seems to be more focused on graduate studies and research, research, research, at the expense of undergraduate academics.”
Liam Keating, 22, was one of the very first students at Stony Brook Southampton and says he unfortunately may be one of the last to graduate from it. “President Kenny tried her hardest to make this a flagship school of sustainability, and now with Stanley, it seems like he’s ‘publish or perish.’ We’re not a big research school here, we’re about teaching people a new way of life.” Keating, an environmental studies major, added, “You can give these students a new campus and new dorms, but you can’t give them back the time and the effort and the work they’ve put in, outside of their studies, to make it a place that people from all over the country want to come to. It’s really hard for us to walk away from that.” He noted that the campus greenhouse and vegetable garden were projects largely conceived and developed by students.
Thiele, who graduated from a then Long Island University owned Southampton in 1976, said the closure has resulted in hundreds of complaints to his office from community members, devastated students and angry parents. He said he’s heard from students who forfeited admissions and scholarships to other schools to instead attend Southampton because Stony Brook officials had said the satellite campus was in no danger of being affected by budget issues.
“I’m going to be homeless on May 15,” said Rorer, the student who moved from Kentucky to attend Southampton. She’s been renting a home in the Hamptons but now will be forced to transfer to main campus, and says she must continue to live off-campus to establish New York State residency to get a tuition break. Rorer says she is now scrambling to find affordable housing close to Stony Brook, where she will grudgingly continue her studies in marine vertebrate biology. “Before coming here, I’d never been a part of something so special and so tight-knit. We’re all here because we care about the environment. We’ve been completely uprooted.”
Others affected by the closure said the expenses they have incurred cannot be made up.
“A year at Stony Brook Southampton is half our yearly income,” said Robert and Michelle Gagermeier of Redmond, Oregon in an email interview. They saved for months to send their son Robert Campbell and his belongings across nearly 3,000 miles in September for his freshman year at Southampton. “Last week, Robert called us in complete devastation. There was no indication that there were any problems that would cause the school to close. Now us and many other parents are faced with emotional and financial stress, because the President decided to close it.”
“This is wrong on so many levels,” said Nancy Cerchiara, mother of Southampton Sophomore Giovanni Cerchiara. She does not buy the budget gap explanation that Stanley has given for the abrupt closure. “I believe that there is a lot more to this entire story. Why was so much money invested in this campus to have it shut down to save a fraction of the dollars spent to renovate it?” Cerchaira says that at this late date, her son has no other option but to register for the fall semester at West Campus. “I can’t help but think this was a very calculated plan to wait to tell these kids so they would have no other choices.”
The Southampton closure shocked many not only because the campus was so recently acquired, but because of the success the school has seen thus far. “It seems a terrible mistake to close the campus, especially when we’ve been seeing increased enrollment,” said Dr. Harold James Quigley, who has taught both political science and environmental planning courses at Southampton. “There’s no startup that can see a profit within its first few years. I can appreciate budget constraints, but according to a number of our local representatives, the money could have been attainable,” he said.
Southampton is not the only Stony Brook campus that is to be abandoned due to budget issues. Stony Brook had been exploring the development of a new campus in Songdo, South Korea, as part of a “global university” where 14 other schools from around the world are represented. One Stony Brook administrator said the university was “indefinitely suspending plans for a campus in Korea,” and that South Korean authorities have not yet been told of the suspension. Melucci clarified these remarks by saying, “We will only move forward on the Korean initiative if there are contractual assurances against losses to Stony Brook.” It is unclear if the school has any such assurances.
The Southampton closure marks the second time in a decade that the campus is being abandoned. The location was initially established as a satellite campus of Long Island University in 1963 and remained that way until 2005, when a cash-strapped LIU announced it would close the facility and its students would be forced to transfer to their main campus in Brookville. At the time, students, faculty and local legislators rallied to save the school, and were seemingly successful when the campus was bought by Stony Brook University in March 2006 under the leadership of Shirley Strum Kenny. At the time, SBU was lacking undergraduate programs in environmental sciences, and university planning committees agreed that Southampton was perfectly poised to become an institution centered on sustainability. Taxpayers footed the $35 million final purchase price via Stony Brook for the 81-acre campus and its buildings, many of which were in gross disrepair.
Stony Brook quickly set out to invigorate its new location and to rework many aspects of the campus so it would be in line with the sustainability-centered programs they would offer there. Over four years, some $43 million was invested in the campus, mostly for renovations. In October 2009, Southampton celebrated the opening of its brand new LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certified library, the first of its kind on Long Island. LEED certification measures building sustainability by analysis of the structure’s water and energy use, materials and practices used in construction, and various other factors. The library is geo-thermally heated and the bathrooms in the facility use rainwater through a collection system on the roof. Now that the campus will be largely shuttered, the new library will close after only 6 months of use. The books housed within will be sent to the main campus, according to student leader Nick Zanussi, who has worked in the library since it opened.
For the hundreds of students who say they have no other choice, making the transition to the main campus next fall may prove to be a challenge. Besides the fact that Stony Brook’s main campus has around 50 times as many students, much of Southampton’s daily operations were deeply rooted in environmentalism. The students ate using biodegradable utensils and would routinely denounce the rare unsustainable Southampton policy, such as the use of plastic wrap to keep apples in the cafeteria fresh.
“When we were at main campus to protest the other day, we called people out for throwing away bottles in regular trash cans instead of recycling,” said Zanussi, a 21-year-old environmental studies major from Sag Harbor. “When we get there, that school’s not going to know what hit them.”
Most unsettling for Zanussi though is the fact that many of his fellow students have said that faced with the closure, they will abandon their education entirely. “25 percent of students here are probably not going to school at all next semester.”
The Stony Brook Press
Latest posts by The Stony Brook Press (see all)
- The Pull List: May 3rd - May 4, 2013
- Stony Brook University Tops NYIT 6-4 - May 4, 2013
- Farewell Editorial - May 4, 2013
USG’s motto is “Students First,” don’t they mean Stony Brook Students first and Southampton students second? How can they revise the USG budget for 2010-2011 and confiscate the student activity fees (last reported at $80,000)paid by the Southampton students. That is misappropriation of funds; as it is not being used for the purpose intended and that is to benefit the students on the Southampton campus.
That money should be returned or better yet, if the students band together, they should insist on using that money to fund their lawsuit.
Send USG a message: ” SOS,our money, our choice”
It won’t be the first time, or the last, that student activity money has been used on lawsuits!
Unfortunately,this is a part of your education that you didn’t sign up for, so stand up for your rights and slay that dragon!
@ Our Money, Our Choice
I believe you are mistaken. At USG we are not confiscating the $80,000 that was normally appropriated to the Southampton Board Finance.
Rather, we are working with the Southampton leadership to use that money on the Southampton Clubs that will move from the Southampton campus to the Main campus.
Also, the SAF is collected in the Fall and Spring semesters. According to President Stanley, there will not be a residential program nor student clubs at the Southampton campus in Fall 2010.
Ms. Harrington wrote an excellent article. I appreciate such thorough reporting of this issue. These students and their dollars have been hijacked by Stanley. At this late date, he has given current Southampton students only one option – either register for classes at main campus or don’t go to school in September. I totally agree that the students funds are being misappropriated – as are the books and contents of the brand new 6 month old LEED certified library (the only such library in the entire SUNY system). This whole situation is disgraceful. Who died and left Stanley king & lord ruler that his word shoudl be final in the face of such strong opposition from every elected official, the students, parents and community? Somewhere in this mess must be something criminal.
To Amelie: The answer to who died and left Dr.Stanley king & lord ruler? That would have been Pres.Shirley Strum-Kenny, but she didn’t die, she just retired (which was long overdue) and the wonderful administration that Stanley inherited in 2009. Pres. Kenny bailed out of a sinking ship before her 5 year plan even got half way through. Now I understand Chancellor Zimpher has her own 5 year plan, how long will she last?
http://www.stonybrook.edu/sb/5yrplan08/
To: Moiz Khan (USG Treasurer)
Would I be mistaken to say that there are rollover funds from the previous years of paid activity fees that would account for the $80,000? The students that are fortunate enough to enroll in classes on the main campus will pay the student activity fee just like any other student who transfers to Stony Brook’s main campus, no matter where they come from. Don’t all Clubs have to apply for funding,isn’t that correct? So the existing clubs on the Southampton campus are NOT simply moved to the main campus, correct?
This is a misappropriation of student funds, because it is not being used for the purpose intended and that was to benefit the students on the Southampton campus. The Southampton campus is a separate entity and is no different than having the Graduate Students Organization separate from USG. Remember that this is just another “deceptive maneuver” by the administration, don’t believe it for a minute.
If you really want to piss off the administration, USG should assist Southampton by doing a fundraiser and help by selling the Save Southampton T-shirts and bumper stickers in the USG Suite. Here is the email address if USG is sincere in helping “Save Southampton” savesbsshirts@gmail.com
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Save-Stony-Brook-Southampton-Tee-Shirts/109750479057443?ref=mf
Your are indeed mistaken. The prospective budget for the 2010-2011 Academic Year only includes expected revenues. It does not include carry-over funds at all.
Southampton clubs that are recognized by Student Activities will be moved to the USG Line Budget. It will be a fairly simple process.
To Moiz Khan
How right you are that the “Prospective Budget” is based on the expected revenue. But then we have the rollover or reserve money which is the money that was not fully used by the clubs and organizations from year to year and what happens to that money? It appears that it goes into a “General fund” and now that Southampton will have no residential program or student clubs, who benefits from that “general fund?” The USG students on the Stony Brook campus, that’s who! Since the “General funding” is for Fall revisions, who benefits, USG Stony Brook students, It is also for emergency funding, who benefits; Southampton students can’t ask for emergency funding they don’t have student clubs anymore (you said it, I didn’t), and then there are the grants, who can apply for a grant,only the USG Stony Brook students, that’s who.
You are not getting it! Once the students from Stony Brook Southampton transfer to the Stony Brook campus they are now “STONY BROOK” students. They pay the Stony Brook student activity fees, no different than a student who transfers from Hofstra. When he/she attended Hofstra he/she paid Hofstra’s student activity fees, now that they transferred to Stony Brook they pay Stony Brook’s set activity fee.
Here is another senerio that might make it a little clearer. You put money in a bank, the bank closes, where is your money?
As USG Treasurer, I commend you for taking an interest in what the papers have to say about USG. Many others have buried their heads in the sand. I’m glad I got your attention it shows your just doing your job!
As far as SUNY is concerned, Stony Brook Southampton and SB Main campus were defined as one campus. There was never really truly distinction as far as USG is concerned. USG main goal is foster student life on campus and barring any miracles, in Fall 2010 there will only be one Stony Brook campus.
I just dont understand how this one guy can do this. If the tax payers paid $78 million with the intent that it would be used to create a 4-yr college in the East End, focusing on environmental sustainability and Stanley now has decided not to provide that, he isnt living up to Stony Brook’s end of the deal. The way I see it, we aren’t getting what we paid for – I want my money back, with interest. If somebody gives me money to do a job and I dont fulfill my part of the bargain, Ive got to give that money back. If he cant pay the tax payers back those millions, then he needs to forfeit the property back to us.
I find it ironic that, while throwing away millions of our dollars already invested in that campus, and complaining about state budget cuts, he is willing to cost the tax payers of this state even more money fighting a law suit rather than postponing the closure until other alternatives can be found.
I dont buy his BS excuses for one minute. And youre right up there – he is hijacking those students. It is disgraceful. Gov Patterson’s email box needs to be flooded.
“When one averages the cost of operating the [Southampton] campus over such a small number, the cost per student is 2.5 times greater than at Stony Brook,” he said.
well duh—they have 20,000 students over there on main and 800 coming in fall at Southampton. Any number divided by 20,000 is going to be a lot smaller for each than if it is divided by 800. Their argument is so ridiculous I can’t even believe they are using it. How stupid do they think we are? Of course they aren’t mentioning that with plans on track to increase Southampton enrollment to 2,500, the cost per student would have been much lower. By shutting it down in the midst of its growth, he isn’t giving this start-up the time to show a reduction in cost. Since he was in charge of developing start-ups at the university he was at before he came here, he knows that.
Stanley, don’t insult our intelligence.
SBS is a resource for the main campus as well, it’s just that few use it. As for the cost, I think it’s worth it considering the per capita activist ratio. If the students of SBS are going to end up on main, then I welcome them on behalf of the Advanced Civil Rights Organization and hope that they raise all the hell they can around here, because heaven knows we need it. Perhaps their passion will wake up those on this campus who sleep and do not know what is really going on, huzzah!
HEY USG! Our Money Our Choice is right! Where IS the USG on supporting the Southampton campus anyway??? Are they standing up for those 800 of our fellow students – 500 current & 300 newly accepted students who were actively being recruited right up till the day before the closure announcement was made.
Recruitment announcements were on the radio SAT SUN & MON – come to southampton. Tues it was announced Southampton is being killed off.
Where is the USG and Why arent they demanding that Stanley be impeached for violating University rules by making such a massive decision about this university without ever even discussing it with the University Council?
IMPEACH
the University Council is supposed to “review all major plans of the head of such institution for its more effective operation and make such recommendations with respect thereto as it deems appropriate. Such plans shall be submitted for approval by the state university trustees, together with the recommendations of the council with respect thereto. The state university trustees shall determine what constitute such major plans, which are hereby generally defined to include, among others, plans for the appraisal or improvement of the faculty and other personnel, expansion or restriction of student admissions….”
None of that was done before Stanley not only restricted Southamtpon admissions but stopped them altogether & decided to close the college. The Council admitted to the press that they were not informed about it. Stanley by-passed the Council on this major decision. He didnt follow university rules or proper procedure & the Council doesnt seem to have an issue with any of this. So why bother having a Council at all?
IMPEACH THEM ALL.
Where IS the USG on all of this & in supporting the Southampton students?
The USG paid for in full the trip to Albany for students from Southampton and Main campus to protest budget cuts.
To Moiz Khan,
Isn’t USG being a hypocrite? “Students First”
I quote your words: “As far as SUNY is Concerned”; are you kidding me???? We have already establised that SUNY doesn’t care! This is the same administration that lied and financially overextended themselves at the expense of the students.
Its too bad you didn’t attend Southampton, I’m sure you would change your views real fast!
Kudos to USG for doing what is expected of them and that is by paying for the students to protest budget cuts in Albany. Don’t the budget cuts affect every SUNY student? It’s always nice to see your student activity fees at work!(yes, I am being sarcastic)
If both campuses are defined as one campus,then why is there a separate line on the 2009-2010 budget and also on the previous academic years budget titled Southampton Activity Fees?
Who is feeding you this information anyway? The administration.
Again, we already determined that they can not be trusted!
Thanks USG!
To Moiz Khan,
USG needs to read wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stony_Brook_University
The Southampton campus and the Manhattan campus are both “BRANCH CAMPUSES” for Stony Brook University.
If the campus in South Korea were ever to open, would SUNY define that under the “one campus rule” also? USG can really have fun when they collect student activity fees in Wons and convert them into US Dollars.
Look at the big picture! No wonder the state is in financial trouble they just keep giving Stony Brook the money to buy acres upon acres of property in Suffolk County. 246 acres were aquired by eminent domain and was sold to Stony Brook (taxpayer money) for a fraction of what it was worth. Maybe they should sell some of that property for what it is really worth and then Southampton can be saved.
The administration had lots of “INTENTIONS”, but it is all at the taxpayers and students expense. It’s time for Daniel Melucci, Assoc. VP of Stategy, Planning and Analysis to follow Pres. Kenny’s footsteps and retire. It was on his watch, along with a few other cronies who worked with Pres. Kenny; that this financial mess got so out of hand. They need to be held accountable and they should be asked to resign.
Thank you Moiz Khan. That was a wonderful thing to do. Its nice to know the USG supports their fellow students. I appreciate that – and your reply. Thanks for being there.
USG Treasurer Opinionates on Election
http://www.sbpress.com/2010/04/usg-treasurer-opinionates-on-election/
The main problem is the USG itself. Clearly the USG does not do enough to reach out to students on campus.
Q: How many students on the Southampton campus cast a vote for the mandatory student activity fee? (No voice, no choice!)
If I were to list the accomplishments of the USG this year, most of that list wouldn’t mean anything to someone not already in USG. It seems that every year is “setting up for next year” and so the question that faces the USG at all times is, when will we actually do something?
A: Now is the time to do something! Something to help the students on the Southampton Campus. “Setting up for next year” does not mean USG should revise the budget to include $80,000 that was to go to Southampton students. No one said the fight or any investigation of misappropriation of funds was over!
Overall, the USG is in good shape for next year.
Sure they are, they are counting on having $80,000 more to spend in the budget, now that Southampton will not have residential students.
Welcome to politics!
You can’t tell me that there wasn’t resentment towards the purchase of Southampton for those who were already on the Stony Brook campus. One of your very own USG Presidents wrote an article in The Stony Brook Independent titled ” Do you feel like you’ve been shafted”.
Here is the link:
http://www.sbindependent.org/node/2048
He writes:
Then there is the animal of Southampton. While I can appreciate the good intent of expanding to another campus, the toll it is taking on the main campus is just not right. President Shirley Strum Kenny has assured us (University Senate Executive Committee) that none of the money or resources from the main campus are going to Southampton, but that’s just impossible. A sub-committee of the University Senate has been established to look into this. I have been placed onto the committee because this affects the limited resources of our quickly expanding main campus.
As we have seen on every facet of this campus, communication has been a disaster. This holds true between students and administration. For the most part, they are willing to listen.
My reply to that comment is: Can they hear us now?
Amazing that a student had more foresight to see what the future would hold. It makes one wonder if the previous administration(I am talking about the two SUNY Interim Chancellors and Pres. Kenny) set Stony Brook and the SUNY system up for failure. Each President has his/her own agenda and Southampton certainly doesn’t fit into President Stanley’s.
USG needs to step up to the plate. Do we stand united? Time will tell!
The president made a decision without the input or even the knowledge of the students, parents, community. legislators, or tax payers whose investment he’s trying to throw away simply because it doesn’t fit in with his focus on corporate research. He made this major decision about the university without following university rules or proper procedure when he never bothered to inform the University Council (as they have admitted). The Council doesn’t seem to have a problem with this. SUNY Chancellor Zimpher doesn’t seem to have a problem with this. Those are the ones towards whom the anger should be directed. I for one appreciate the USG helping make the trip to Albany possible and I hope they will continue to stand with the Southampton students. This fight is NOT over. It’s only just begun. If the Southampton Student funds are already being distributed to the West campus, please keep very accurate records over there. Those funds will have to be sent back to Southampton because right will always prevail over wrong – even when the one doing the wrong is a university president.
PS.
IMPEACH STANLEY & THE UNIVERSITY COUNCIL.
To Colleen Harrington:
This Dialogue should give you plenty to write about!
To USG:
On 4/07/10 President Stanley announces he is mothballing most of the Southampton Campus. By 4/13/10, at the very next USG Senate meeting, USG is making plans for the student activity fees that had already been appropriated to the students of the Southampton campus.
This can be found on the USG webite, here is the link:
http://sbusg.org/2010/04/13/senate-minutes-41310/
Consideration of rescinding the previously approved budget:
Presented by Treasurer Khan Approximately $85,000 was allocated to Stony Brook Southampton which might be closing. Sen. Fan made a motion to rescind the budget. Seconded. After no debate a vote was taken. The budget was rescinded (17-1-1).
The key words are that “Stony Brook Southampton might be closing,” so aren’t you premature (6 days after Pres. Stanley’s announcement) with even taking a vote on rescinding the budget? Even though this was open for discussion, did anyone research or even considered looking into the legalities of USG’s actions, or, where matters just taken into your own hands?
What I want to know is:
Who is minding the store? Who is advising you or are you just winging it? To make a decision that leaves USG vulnerable to investigation or a lawsuit, is negligent! If there is someone that is supposed to be overseeing your activities and who allowed this; they should be held personally accountable.
USG, you need to look, before you leap!
Especially since Senator LaValle and Congressman Thiele are reportedly requesting a full investigation by the NYS Comptroller’s and NYS Attorney General’s offices.
To be continued……
just wondering… is there Southampton campus student representative on the USG executive committee or on any student government committee at the main campus?
SAVE SOUTHAMPTON CAMPUS FUNDRAISER
May 20th, 2010 at 7pm – 11pm.
Enjoy the SAVE SOUTHAMPTON CAMPUS benefit dinner in a unique night at the Atlantis Aquarium. Come spend the evening with the sharks, fish, stingrays, seals and the monkeys!
FEATURING:
LIVE MUSIC FROM LOCAL MUSICIANS
SILENT AUCTION SHOWCASING WORKS OF LOCAL PROFESSIONAL ARTISTS
AUCTIONS OF ITEMS FROM LOCAL MERCHANTS
The event will feature keynote speaker
GORIDAN RAACKE
Executive … more Director of Renewable Energy Long Island
In 2007 Mr. Raacke was selected as a Climate Change Messenger to take part in a demanding training program led by former Vice President Al Gore to help spread the word about the dangerous threat of and solutions to global warming. We are extremely honored to have him support our cause and speak to us at our event!
Remarks also made by our local elected officials who have been fighting extremely hard for these students to KEEP OUR SCHOOL!
All SBS parents and members of the community are welcome to attend this event. This is going to be a spectacular evening for all to gather together and support this beloved cause, while enjoying each others company, in addition to those who are extremely successful within the environmental sustainability industry!
This is going to be a BIG ONE!!!
Purchase tickets at http://savethecollege.org/events.html
Scroll to the bottom of the page for details & to purchase tickets
To SB-Southampton Mom,
Thank you for posting the fundraiser at Atlantis Aquarium on May 20th to Save the Southampton Campus.
Anyone who will attend, that is either a student or faculty at the West campus (Stony Brook) will feel right at home; because they swim with the Sharks and a few stingrays on a daily basis!
The monkeys are those who experience all the wrongdoing that is being done on the west campus, but choose to speak no evil, see no evil or hear no evil!
To Hank,
The Undergraduate Student Government’s (USG) Executive Council on the Stony Brook campus is represented by undergraduate students who attend that campus. On the Southampton campus they have what is called a Board of Finances and most of what they do is dictated by USG.
This is what it says on the SBS website:
The Board of Finances is an agency of the Undergraduate Student Government. The Board of Finances receives funding based on the number of full time Stony Brook Southampton students that pay the undergraduate student activity fee. This fee is then dispersed between the clubs/organizations, campus wide programming, and The Board of Finances programming. The Board of Finances is governed by the Organic Act, the Undergraduate Student Government Constitution and the Financial By-Laws.
http://www.stonybrook.edu/sb/southampton/finance_board.shtml
http://www.stonybrook.edu/sb/southampton/clubs.shtml
To Bob,
Although the campuses are miles apart, you are right, there is a big disconnect from the life style on the west campus. The draw for a lot of admissions on the west campus, is the many sports teams that are supported by student activity fee money and the extensive curriculum.
To have over 160 clubs and organizations on the west campus,shows that the campus is very diversified. There are numerous cultural clubs and sports clubs that were unheard of in the 60′s and 70′s.
The west campus, with all it has to offer, is worlds apart!
The activity fees for the students on the Southampton campus should have been reduced to meet the needs of only the clubs on that campus.
The only press that Southampton has gotten in any of the school newspapers is when Stony Brook took Southampton over and when Stony Brook pulled the rug out from under them. This is total disconnect, if you ask me.
I cannot speak for all Southampton alumni, but I know the feeling is shared among many of us. When I attended Southampton from ’78-’82, we felt, at best, disconnected from the rest of LIU. When we did receive attention from the west, it never seemed like it was in our best interest. We were Southampton College students; we didn’t feel like LIU students (and I never hear from LIU anymore, so apparently the feeling is mutual). I suspect the current Southampton students are feeling much the same way about SB now. Something about that campus creates a close-knit community with a passion that frankly has surprised many alumni of other colleges. No matter what the campus is named or what university system it belongs to, I have continued to feel that Southampton is STILL MY SCHOOL and I feel a sense of solidarity with the current students. I like and support Fred Thiele’s desire to make Southampton its own independent SUNY campus. Southampton College has always stood apart as unique. It’s time to make it official.
The news of what is happening is not confined to Long Island or New York State. Many out-of-state Southampton alumni like myself are following these developments closely; this is nationwide news. I urge any alumni that haven’t yet, to do as I have and make a donation to the legal fund.
It’s been said that those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. Stony Brook should have learned from LIU’s mistakes. I hope to hear tales in the near future of President Stanley commiserating with David Steinberg.
Bob that was really a very nice note. The Southampton students would very much appeciate seeing that. Please consider copying/paste to their facebook page SAVE-STONY-BROOK-UNIVERSITY-SOUTHAMPTON-CAMPUS or send an email to the contact addresses at http://savethecollege.org
thank you so much for your support.
FUNDRAISER MAY 20 7pm ATLANTIS MARINE WORLD AQUARIUM
ALL ARE WELCOMR
PRICE OF TICKETS IS A DONATION TO THE FUND & TAX DEDUCTIBLE
http://savethecollege.org/events.html
Bob, you said it for me. Wish I were there to fight/strive to keep Southampton College, my alma mater, open. I’m doing the best I can from South Carolina.
Here is an interesting rummor:
Zimpher for NCAA President?
FOX 40 WICZ TV – Zimpher for NCAA President? [4/27/2010] – News, Sports, Weather, Contests and More.
wicz.com
Rumors have spread that SUNY Chancellor Nancy Zimpher may be looking for a new job.Yesterday, an Albany Times Union columnist wrote about the growing rumors that Zimpher is pursuing a new gig as commissioner …
http://wicz.com/news2005/viewarticle.asp?a=13874
Oh no, that would mean that President Stanley might apply for SUNY Chancellor! Not to worry, Zimpher was making $490,000 and Stanley is making $650,000. It looks like Stony Brook will be stuck with Stanley unless someone can top the $650,000 mark.
To USG:
SUNY has “Audit Guidelines” for Student Government Associations here is the link:
http://www.suny.edu/UniversityAuditor/sga.cfm
Under Oversight it states:
The Campus should include the Student Government Assoc. (SGA) as an assessable unit within its internal control program. (Best Practice)
The Campus should ensure there is proper and effective Campus support (advisement and services) for the SGA. A responsible Campus official should be present at all board meetings and available to advise students on various matters. (Required)
Who and where are these “RESPONSIBLE CAMPUS OFFICIALS” and are they even present at the USG senate meetings? If they were, then they should have advised the senate that they should look into the legalities of revising the budget before they did anything.
Q: Who is in charge of Risk Manangement for USG? They should be fired!!
Q: Did the Stony Brook campus or USG include the Southampton Board of Finances as an assessable unit within its internal control program?
Again, no voice for the Southampton students, no choice for the Southampton students!
To: Our Money, our choice
An answer to one of your questions:
Re: Our Trust is Very Expensive
By Kaye Stevens
Statesman: Published: Thursday, May 3, 2007
Updated: Sunday, May 17, 2009
This is in response to your April 23 editorial, “Our Trust is Very Expensive,” which brings up the idea of an “effective check-and-blance system.”
Isn’t that the responsibility of the USG Executive Director? Not having access to the job description, I am under the belief that the role of the USG Executive Director was to ensure that the student government operates within its known rules and regulations.
Unfortunately, in the past, when the Executive Director has tried to enforce these rules and to prevent the abuses that have occurred this semester, they have been fired, (in the case of Sonia Guttman). How often has her replacement, Eunice Ro, been to senate meetings? Has she sat in on the Budget Committee hearing to ensure the fair distribution of the USG Budget, based on need and not cliques? Does she have the background to oversee the financial records of USG? Is she even supervising the USG Executive staff to make sure abuses don’t occur?
http://www.sbstatesman.com/2.870/re-our-trust-is-very-expensive-1.37388
Our Trust is Very Expensive
By Statesman Editorial Board
Published: Sunday, April 22, 2007
Updated: Sunday, May 17, 2009
The USG has now demonstrated that it cannot be left as the sole decision-maker to allocate funds. Who would be more authoritative than the administration itself to provide more oversight? A smudge on the Senate’s character smears the entire administration and the University. The administration needs to step up to this challenge and bring back the reputability of the Senate as it was years ago.
With power, comes not just great responsibility, but greater means to instill change. In the past, students have voted to mandate the student activities fee. Despite the gradual increase in the fee, they have continued to faithfully pay it with the mutual understanding that the USG will use it for our benefit. But because of the continual abuse of their power, it has now become harder to gain both our trust and respect.
http://www.sbstatesman.com/2.870/our-trust-is-very-expensive-1.37458
Nothings changed “Our Trust is even more expensive”
I like the comment that David Mazza, who is the USG VP of Communications and Public Relations wrote in the SB Think magazine about an article titled “USG: Represent!”
David Mazza
Full Disclosure: USG Member here.
It is true that this senate has done little or nothing to advocate for students, but that is because we allow students to win who are only here for their resume, or the meager $60 /week. It is true that when faced with a real issue, the majority of the senate will respond with blank stares.
http://thinksb.com/2010/02/usg-represent/
Great PR for USG! This confirms what I have already said.
To Moiz Khan,
If the Stony Brook and Southampton campuses were defined as one campus by SUNY; why didn’t the students at Southampton have access to any of the discounted Long Island Railroad tickets (ALIRRT) that USG sold on the west campus?
Aren’t those tickets subsidized by the student activity fees?
The 2009-2010 budget for those tickets was $59,000.00.
Did they have easy access to your free legal clinic?
When I say easy access, was there ever a time that the USG lawyer was on the Southampton campus to council individual students?
The budget for legal fees is $45,000.00, how much of that is just for the “FREE” legal clinic?
Was there a PASS tutoring program set up on the Southampton campus?
I don’t expect a response, I already know the answers!
“STONY BROOK STUDENTS FIRST”
discounted LIRR Tickets?? I had no idea there was such a thing. my kid never got any at Southampton
USG, I think you may have a problem!
The USG Constitution (“the supreme law of the land”) was last ammended on November 17, 2006. If Southampton has a Board of Finances and USG has labeled them as an “Agency” of USG, why is there no mention of this agency in your Constitution?
If you don’t recognize them in your own Constitution then they must not exist.
If you read the Southampton Organic Act which provides a Government for the Southampton Campus it states that the Organic Act must: “Be it enacted by the Senate of the Undergraduate Student Government.” Who died and left the USG Senate in charge!
The Organic Act was approved by the USG Senate on 9/27/07, all of which were Stony Brook Students (those attending the West campus),there was no one from the Southampton campus present to represent the Southampton students. The vote was taken by voice count. The students from the Southampton campus had no say in the matter and this, in itself, is unconstitutional. Again, no voice, no choice.
http://sbusg.org/2007/09/27/senate-minutes-92707/
I want to know who wrote up the “Stony Brook Southampton Organic Act”, as it is self serving to USG and enables USG to control the activity fee money that is paid by the students of the Southampton campus.
You are being dictated to by a dysfunctional student government that is being ill advised. Since you are alienated by distance and there is a real lack of communication between campuses; what you don’t know is hurting you!
This is the link to the Southampton Organic Act:
http://www.stonybrook.edu/sb/southampton/Organic_Act_2007-08.pdf
Southampton Students,your student activity fees have been hijacked!
This is just another DECEPTIVE move made by the “RESPONSIBLE CAMPUS OFFICIALS” that wrote the Southampton Organic Act and who were present during the September 27,2007 Senate meeting.
God helps those who help themselves and USG has helped themselves to your student activity fees!
This is another reason why legal action needs to be taken. Anyone who needs the information about the pending lawsuit can find it at this link:
http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=106675082705901&topic=178
I know I will be contacting them!
not just my student activities fees were hijacked. I have been hijacked! It’s impossible to do a college search now & find another college that fits me. Stony Brook is great for those students who are looking for everything it has to offer. I didnt need all of that. I just wanted a small college in the country where I could focus on MY interests – the environment. Stony Brook has a lot of great things but it’s not for me. Southampton is. But now I am hijacked. I have no place else to go EXCEPT to Stony Brook. Or else don’t go to any school at all in September. My student activity fees are the least of worries. I am forced now to go & pay for a school that I didn’t ask to attend. I feel like I bought & paid for a cruise to the Bahamas and the boat took me to Alaska!
P.S.
Is there an inaccurate statement on the Student Life- Board of Finances webpage?
http://www.stonybrook.edu/sb/southampton/finance_board.shtml
It states:
The Board of Finances is an agency of the Undergraduate Student Government. The Board of Finances receives funding based on the number of full time Stony Brook Southampton students that pay the undergraduate student activity fee.
All students are being charged the activity fee, not just the “FULL
TIME” students. They pay per credit.
Here is the website for the UG (Undergraduate) activity fee schedule for Southampton:
http://www.stonybrook.edu/bursar/tuition/sh.shtml
So, if only the full time activity fees are being allocated to the Southampton Board of Finances, where is the rest of the activity fee money going?
Got an answer for that USG?
whats the point in all this arguing online?
it wont change anything.
seccession is the only answer
simple solution: SUNY Southampton
The point is to show the student body that if this continued; with USG holding Southampton’s purse strings; the students on the Southampton campus would have eventually been bilked for hundreds of thousands of dollars!
These funds should never have been combined, this is being dictated to the USG students by the administration; those “(IR)RESPONSIBLE CAMPUS OFFICIALS.”
The power and the manipulation of the adminstration is just too strong for the students to handle. The students priorities are in the right place when it comes to studying and they don’t have time to deal with the bureacratic BS. When they do, they get jockeyed from one administrator to another and they just get worn down.
If you throw your hands up and let the administration do what they want, the students always suffer in the long run.
We all have our battles to pick, I may no longer be in need of the Southampton campus, but that does not mean I should shut the door on fighting this injustice!
I am 100% with you on Saving Southampton, but a light needed to be shed on all that you had to loose or will loose if the campus remains open and the activity fees are mishandled as they are right now.
The Southampton students didn’t have a voice or a choice in the setup of the student activity fees. They had no say nor were they given any consideration at the USG Senate meeting on 4/13/10, when the 2010-2011 budget was rescinded. They were too trusting and blindsided by the administration and now by their peers on the west campus.
For those of you, who are about to loose your beloved campus, focus on that fight. With a little help, I plan on taking care of this one!
Thank you for taking on that important issue. It will be very much needed when the environmental college at Southampton is still operational in the fall & the money has to be returned!
Come join us for an amazing night at Atlantis Marine World as we support the cause to Save the College at Southampton!!
May 20th, 2010 at 7pm.
Enjoy our benefit dinner in a unique night at the Aquarium.
FEATURING:
LIVE MUSIC FROM LOCAL MUSICIANS
SILENT AUCTION SHOWCASING WORKS OF LOCAL PROFESSIONAL ARTISTS
AUCTIONS OF ITEMS FROM LOCAL MERCHANTS
The event will feature keynote speaker
GORDIAN RAACKE
Executive Director of Renewable Energy Long … more Island
In 2007 Mr. Raacke was selected as a Climate Change Messenger to take part in a demanding training program led by former Vice President Al Gore to help spread the word about the dangerous threat of and solutions to global warming. We are extremely honored to have him support our cause and speak to us at our event!
Remarks also made by our local elected officials who have been fighting extremely hard for us students to KEEP OUR SCHOOL!
We would like as many parents and members of the community to attend this event. This is going to be a spectacular evening for all of us to gather together and support our beloved cause, while enjoying each others company in addition to those who are extremely successful within our desired industry!
This is going to be a BIG ONE guys!!!
Price of Tickets is a Tax-deductible charitable donation!
PurchaseTickets at: http://savethecollege.org/events.html
*Corporate Sponsorship Packages Available*
*AD’s Available in the Events Program*
Checks payable to:
Save the College at Southampton Inc.
P.O. Box 1176, Southampton, NY 11969
Please RSVP by May 15th
In May, 2010, the Students and the SAVE The College non-profit group of alumni and community members did file a lawsuit in NYS Supreme Court. They sued SBU, the president, the university council, as well as the SUNY Board of Trustees for the closure of their college at Southampton.
In August 2010, the judge ruled in the students’ favor, finding that SBU & its president violated state law. The closure of the college at Southampton is ILLEGAL and SBU has been stopped from taking any further action.
The students now have filed for a final judgement ordering SBU to reinstate the college, restore its programs, and reopen the campus to full operations by the Spring 2011 semester. Let no one ever tell our young that they can’t or shouldn’t do what they believe is right, because they will make fools of us every time. Courage has no age limits.
(press release)STATEMENT OF ASSEMBLYMAN FRED W. THIELE ON STATE SUPREME COURT DECISION DECLARING THE CLOSING OF SOUTHAMPTON CAMPUS ILLEGAL
“By a decision dated August 27, 2010, the State Supreme Court of the State of New York has declared the closing of Southampton college by President Sam Stanley and Stony Brook University to be illegal. That decision has been annulled and Stony Brook University has been enjoined from taking any further actions to close the campus. The students of the Southampton campus are to be congratulated for taking action against this unfair, ill-considered, and now illegal action to close their school. They have fought for their rights and won. In the process they have benefited us all.
Stony Brook University made the decision behind closed doors to shut down the Southampton college. Not only did they fail to consult with its University Council as required by law, they failed to consult with elected officials, community leaders, students and even administrators at the Southampton campus. The entire process lacked transparency and openness. The reason is obvious. The closure of the school cannot be defended in an open discussion.
New York State has invested $78 million at the Southampton campus. That investment was beginning to bear fruit. This past year admission applications were up 54% and SAT scores of applicants were up 100 points. Because of the leadership of the new Dean, Mary Pearl, the school was well on its way to meeting the ultimate goal of 2,000 students. The school was succeeding.
A new Stony Brook President with a hidden agenda to close the campus had to lie to the public to justify his decision. He lied when he said the basis of the decision was financial. He lied when he told the public that under LIU, Southampton College lost $20 million a year. He lied when he said that every Stony Brook would save $6.7 million a year by closing the campus. He lied when he said it costs 2 and a half times as much to educate a student at Southampton as it does at Stony Brook. He lied when he stated 100% of the Southampton students would attend Stony Brook. He lied when he said that the students would be able to get all their classes this year at the Stony Brook campus.
This reckless decision was made behind closed doors, because it could not stand the light of day. If the discussion had been open and transparent, the truth would have won out.
The result of these lies is the waste of a $78 million state taxpayer investment. Further, students have been irreparably damaged both financially and academically. Finally, the East End has temporarily lost the economic and social benefit of the Southampton campus.
Pursuant to the court decision, we will seek the re-opening of the Southampton campus with all deliberate speed. We are at a crossroads. Stony Brook University has a choice.
Stony Brook can continue down its current path of arrogantly attempting to steamroll a community with this reckless decision. If Stony Brook does so, it will continue to fritter away whatever goodwill it still has on the East End, expose the taxpayers of New York State to the inevitable class action lawsuit that students and families will bring for the damages caused by its illegal decision, and find itself in a continuing battle with community leaders over the future of the campus.
The alternative is to finally involve the public and all those with an interest in the future of the Southampton campus to enact a plan that fully realizes the potential of this campus. Such a plan cannot be one that utilizes the campus only for the convenience of Stony Brook, but a plan that meets the real needs of the residents of the East End and all of New York State.”
STATEMENT OF ASSEMBLYMAN FRED W. THIELE ON STATE SUPREME COURT DECISION DECLARING THE CLOSING OF SOUTHAMPTON CAMPUS ILLEGAL
www.NY.gov