Long Island is one of the 10 regions that will be competing for, as Zimpher put it, “millions and millions of dollars” in funding as part of Governor Andrew Cuomo’s regional economic development plan.

Zimpher and the five presidents each spoke on behalf of SUNY and Long Island, although Zimpher plans on holding similar events with SUNY schools in each of the other nine regions.

Shaun McKay, Suffolk Community College’s President, said he was excited about the $135 million in new infrastructure coming to his campus. “That’s what it’s really about,” he said, “jobs.”

McKay was joined by President Samuel Stanley of Stony Brook, President Calvin Butts of Old Westbury, President Hubert Keen of Farmingdale and President Donald Astrab of Nassau Community College.

Small displays staffed by professors, faculty and graduate students, each one featuring an attention-grabbing program hosted at one of the universities, filled the Wang Center’s three major lobbies.

One display showed a compost heap while the display next to it allowed attendees to operate a flight simulator used in an aeronautics program.

While the Chancellor and presidents emphasized their ability to make good use of funding to their audience of Long Island-based state politicians, the staffs at many of the booths didn’t want to talk about attracting state dollars.

“We’re just letting the public know what we have,” said Andrea Daly, a nurse in Stony Brook University Hospital’s CTIC unit. She said that fund raising was not the reason she and her team were demonstrating the pacemaker. A number of other tables expressed a similar sentiment.

Some display teams even seemed to have a separate motive of their own.

“We’re looking for potential bone marrow donors,” said one hospital employee, pointing attendees to a table staffed by doctors with cheek swaps and donor forms.

The Dean of International Academic Programs and Services, Dr. William Arens, said that Stanley’s office asked him to present at the showcase. “SUNY knows that we are a major player in international affairs,” he said, echoing Stanley’s talking points.

The presidents stressed that improvements to their schools would reverberate beyond Long Island. “SUNY and Stony Brook are interested in being global universities,” said Stanley.

“Once you reinvigorate the State of New York,” said Butts of the regional economic development plan, “you invigorate the rest of the country.”

That’s an annual increase of $300, the maximum increase allowed by the newly implemented NYSUNY 2020 bill that passed the legislature late last week.

The resolution is expected to pass tomorrow’s meeting of the Board. If it does, the new tuition rates will take effect immediately, beginning this fall. Out-of-state tuition is not outlined in the resolution, as those rates are to be determined by Stony Brook University and not the SUNY board.

Think will be at tomorrow’s board meeting reporting on all of the details.

Most notable is the absence of a “Keep It At SUNY” provision, which would guarantee that all revenue generated from tuition hikes remained within the SUNY system. Previous tuition increases imposed by the state have been poorly received because as much as 90% of those increases have gone back into the state’s general fund.

Based on statements given to Think on Thursday by Senators LaValle and Flanagan, it became clear that while there is support for the “Keep It At SUNY” provision, it would nonetheless not be in the bill.

At the same time, the bill does contain a Maintenance of Effort provision, guaranteeing that SUNY’s state funding will remain at or above the budget for the 2010-2011 academic year, but only under the condition that it could be cut if the Governor, with the consent of the Assembly and Senate, declares a fiscal emergency.

Also missing from the bill is fully differential tuition. President Stanley and SUNY Chancellor Nancy Zimpher had consistently argued that individual SUNY campuses, particularly the four university centers, should be able to charge higher tuition rates to fund their more expensive research programs.

Instead, this bill calls for a system-wide increase of up to $300 for each of the next five years, not the seven to eight percent increase at the university centers as the original bill provided.

For out-of-state students though, differential tuition will take effect this fall. University centers are now authorized to increase their out-of-state tuition rates by as much as 10%, potentially a $1,300 increase every year. The exact figures will remain unclear until each university submits its proposal to the SUNY Board of Trustees, due in November.

While the version of the bill that passed on Friday was weaker in many areas than President Stanley and SUNY had hoped for, SUNY spokesman Morgan Hook released a statement almost immediately after the final vote in the Assembly applauding the bill’s passage.

When Stony Brook University spokeswoman Lauren Sheprow was asked on Thursday if President Stanley would still support the bill without “Keep It At SUNY”, she pointed out that he was on the record as saying the bill’s success was conditional on the university keeping all of the money.

Even so, President Stanley joined the chorus of supporters in commending Albany for the bill’s passage.

“We express our deepest gratitude to Governor Cuomo, Senate Majority Leader Skelos, Assembly Speaker Silver and the entire State Legislature for a bill that is absolutely transformative,” said President Stanley in prepared remarks released by SUNY shortly after the bill passed.

The threat of tuition increases funneling back to the state’s general fund remains low at this point. Governor Cuomo has promised that any additional revenue generated by these tuition increases will remain at SUNY, and the Keep It In SUNY provision has the support of leadership in the Senate and Assembly.

“The university trusts that the governor is good for his word, and that’s why it was very important that they passed the bill,” said Sheprow when reached for comment on Saturday.

SUNY Chancellor Nancy Zimpher has also gone on the record as trusting Cuomo’s promise.

But trusting promises from Albany is a hard pill to swallow for some. United University Professions spokeswoman Denyce Duncan Lacy says that while the UUP is largely pleased with the final bill, they will be keeping a close eye on Albany.

“We believe the intention is there to keep the money on the campuses, but we’ll be watching very closely, we’ll be very vigilant,” she said.

Promises also have a shelf life of as long as a term lasts. Governor Cuomo will be up for reelection in 2014, and the entire legislature even sooner than that. Since the plan goes on for five years, a whole new group of lawmakers could oversee the final years of implementation of NYSUNY 2020.

And if the economy falters, SUNY could be in trouble. Language in the bill already suggests that SUNY could be a likely target for additional cuts in the case of a fiscal emergency.

Despite the changes from the original bill, SUNY and its university presidents have remained unanimously supportive of the revised version of NYSUNY 2020, at least publically.

Privately though, whispers of reservations over what was left out have already begun to surface.

SUNY claims all efforts are related to “education, research, and training programs.”

The lobbying reports contain addendums for vague “lobbying issue areas,” like “Energy and Water” and “Agriculture.” Along with these benignities are the terms “Defense” and “Homeland Security,” appearing on five lobbying reports, including one from 2010 that totals $480,000 in lobbying expenses.

“SUNY could be pushing specific projects and applications related to homeland security and defense,” said Les Paldy, a distinguished service professor in the Department of Technology and Society here at Stony Brook University.

SUNY’s Evasive Lobby

Though SUNY’s lobbying expenses are miniscule compared to its overall $11 billion budget, (SUNY is America’s largest public university system), SUNY spent approximately $1.9 million on lobbying in 2010, more than any other university system in the nation. Dr. John Marburger, who served as president of Stony Brook from 1980 to 1994 and presidential science advisor to George W. Bush, believes that the money spent on lobbying executive branches like the Department of Defense and Homeland Security is ultimately a waste.

“The overwhelming majority of money we get for federal research comes from the result of peer-reviewed competitive research proposals,” Marburger said. “There are two negative aspects of lobbying for earmarks. It takes money out of competitive programs like Stony Brook and it makes the executive branch agencies angry. Earmarking is a practice that agencies don’t like because it disrupts their budgets.”

Earmarking is a common legislative practice in which funds of a proposed bill are directed to specific projects that might or might not be relevant to the overall bill. Research universities like Stony Brook compete for grants (in which the outcome of research is unclear) and contracts (specific tasks that need to be executed) from the federal government routinely. The Department of Defense, with its swelling three quarters of a trillion dollar budget, and the Department of Homeland Security are two major providers of research money for antiterrorism, security, and engineering initiatives.

Officials at Stony Brook and SUNY were laconic and evasive when pressed for specific details about SUNY’s lobbying activity in those areas.

“Right now our primary federal focus is restoration of the proposed cuts to Pell grants,” said Vanessa Herman, Assistant Director for Governmental Relations and higher education at Stony Brook. Herman, a lobbyist for SUNY who often travels to Washington, is a listed lobbyist in four of the five lobbying reports obtained from opensecrets.org that mention homeland security and/or defense. Herman refused to comment further about what the specific education, research, and training programs related to homeland security and defense actually entail.

Morgan Hooks of the SUNY Office of Communications refused to elaborate as well, asking to see one of the lobbying reports via e-mail before declining to comment on how lobbying efforts for the Department of Defense and Homeland Security are linked to educational initiatives.

And David K. Belsky, press officer and director of new media at SUNY, initially offered to comment on this story. However, after being asked how much of the $1.7 million is spent on lobbying initiatives related to the Department of Defense and Homeland Security, what the actual education, research, and training programs are, and why SUNY would be lobbying for bills like The Chemical Facility Antiterrorism Act (H.R. 2868). Belsky did not respond to any of our question. Instead, he referred us back to Hooks, who was not willing to answer any questions or disclose any information related to the lobbying reports.

Inside the Reports

The reports can, to an extent, speak for themselves: one lobbying report filed in 2009 by Michael Trunzo, SUNY Vice Chancellor for Governmental Relations, includes a “lobbying activity” for the aforementioned Chemical Facility Antiterrorism Act (H.R. 2868). Herman is the only listed lobbyist for SUNY on that bill.

The goals of the bill, which never became law, were to amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to enhance security and protect against acts of terrorism against chemical facilities. It also sought to amend the Safe Drinking Water Act in order to bolster the security of public water systems and amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to strengthen the security of wastewater treatment works.

“I wouldn’t think universities would lobby for a bill like that [H.R. 2868] unless it had a provision in it that would either exempt universities from a requirement or amend existing laws that would decrease bureaucracy in some way,” Marburger said. In a closer examination of the bill’s language, subtle and somewhat nebulous links can be drawn between its non-academic goals and higher education. One section of the bill stipulates that it will “establish, as appropriate…procedures for security vulnerability assessments and site security plans for covered chemical facilities that are also academic laboratories.” Academic laboratories are later defined in the bill as facilities owned by an institution of higher education where relatively small quantities of chemicals are used for teaching, research, and diagnostic purposes, and are typically handled by one person.

In another report filed in 2009, SUNY lobbied for “authorizations” and “appropriations” related to the bluntly-named National Center for Security and Preparedness. NCSP is affiliated with the Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy at the State University of New York at Albany. Established in 2007, NCSP’s stated mission is to support America’s efforts to be “secure from acts of terrorism and to be prepared to respond to incidents of high consequence and disasters through research, education, training, and technical assistance.” NCSP has been involved in developing training courses for the New York State Office of Homeland Security. NCSP’s official website does not mention any current projects from either 2010 or 2011.

Syracuse-based lobbyist Michael Brower was paid nearly $17,000 in 2010 to lobby for  SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry. He advanced the lobbying issue “Source Sentinel-detection of biologics in water for national defense.” Source Sentinel LLC is a company that provides monitoring awareness for water and wastewater contaminants. “Biologics” is a general term that can refer to vaccines, blood components, allergenics, gene therapy, tissues, and recombinant and therapeutic proteins. These are technologically-produced and could theoretically be employed as biological weapons.

It is still unclear if the money for these lobbying efforts is drawn from actual state money or a fund established by the SUNY Research Foundation (a private non-profit group that supports SUNY research). Marburger would not be pleased if the money was siphoned from public funds.

“I don’t think it’s a wise investment,” he said. “Frankly, I don’t think it helps Stony Brook much. When I was president, I opposed earmarks.”

A view of protestors gathered in Tahrir, or Liberation Square, in Cairo, Egypt, Monday, Jan. 31, 2011. (AP Photo/Lefteris Pitarakis)

The ongoing protests in Egypt have led to the State University of New York pulling its students who were studying at the American University of Cairo, Think has learned.

Stony Brook University was not among the campuses with students in Egypt, said William Arens, the Dean of International Academic Programs, but other students from the SUNY system were just beginning their spring semesters when the demonstrations began.

According to Lori Thompson, the associate director for international partnerships at SUNY’s Office of International Programs, seven or eight students were participating in programs in Egypt at the time tensions began to mount in the region.

Five of those students were in Cairo through a program run by SUNY Cortland in upstate New York. SUNY’s study abroad programs are run by individual universities in the system, but are open to any of the system’s 460,000-plus students to enroll.

Two students from Geneseo, two from the University of Buffalo and one from New Paltz participated in Cortland’s program, according to Jennifer Wilson, the director of Public Relations at Cortland.

“They’re all safe, in a safe state,” said Wilson. “Two opted to stay in Frankfurt, and three are in Istanbul, Turkey.”

All five students witnessed at least some of the protests. Four of the five students were in Cairo as late as yesterday, and the fifth left Egypt on Tuesday according to Wilson.

Wes Kennison, a faculty fellow for international programs at Geneseo, said that the SUNY students were among the last Americans to evacuate the country.

The American University in Cairo is situated away from most of the city’s hotspots for demonstrations, said Kennison. The safest option for the 300 students studying at the American University in Cairo was to keep them in the dormitories. The army was called in to protect them.

Communications with their students was difficult. Cell phone and Internet service in the country was shut down for days, and according to Kennison there was a single landline into the dormitories.

“What complicated the whole system was the state department warning to evacuate was a recommended evacuation, not a mandatory one,” he said.

Cortland too was strongly urging it’s students to leave the country, but it wasn’t until Monday that Cortland President Erik Bitterbaum officially pulled the plug on the program.

“SUNY Cortland discontinued the program and sent a letter to students and their parents,” said Wilson. “We didn’t want to give them a reason to stay.”

“The decision that [Cortland] made was in consultation with us and their collaborating campuses. It was kind of a tough decision but one we concurred on,” said Kennison.

“Some of the students were like ‘sure, I’ll leave,’ but some of them wanted to stay,” he said. “On the one hand, if I were there I would want to be out marching on the streets, too. A great moment in history is a very powerful draw.”

But as the protests continued and took a more violent turn, the safety of students ultimately took on a renewed sense of urgency.

“There were a couple of specific things we were concerned about,” said Kennison. “The first was when the food started to run out because of the shut down of the economy.”

Besides that, officials from Cortland feared that demonstrators upset with President Mubarak would redirect their frustrations towards foreigners if Mubarak left office.

“We went from strongly urging the students to leave, to Cortland essentially making them,” said Kennison.

As for the students themselves, refunds are being offered, as well as an extension to enroll in the Spring semester should they choose to return to New York. They are also free to find alternative study abroad programs in other locations.

After SUNY Chancellor Nancy Zimpher was summoned to appear before the State Senate Committee on Higher Education, her foot soldiers of spin sent out a press release touting her “bold and creative leadership.” It heralded Zimpher and her top deputy for waiving their housing allowances to fund huge raises for executive staffers. But if the media hadn’t publicized the raises in the first place, Zimpher’s move to line the pockets of her cronies would have gone unchecked by the legislature.

Her decision to dole out pay raises of 10 to 13 percent to her executive staff couldn’t have come at a worse time. SUNY Central employs 441 people (78 of whom make more than $100,000), and more than 200 of those workers have been forced to stay home one or two days a month and lose a day’s pay. And while Zimpher and pals have campaigned ceaselessly for greater autonomy, many New Yorkers have gotten acquainted with the Chancellor by reading about this performance before the State Senate in the papers.

After unpacking her bags in New York last year, Zimpher has few accomplishments to show. Zimpher often mentions that she has visited all 64 campuses, but that tour only took 100 days and cost SUNY more than $27,000—nearly the annual salary of one of the security guards Zimpher laid off over the summer. She’s spent countless hours simpering about New York’s need for PHEEIA—even while she was testifying before state senators about exorbitant raises and perks she gave to her top officials. Zimpher even managed to throw in a jab about how legislators failed to pass the PHEEIA legislation. But even if her lobbying had been successful, she doesn’t seem like a leader who needs less oversight.

There is something that Zimpher hasn’t done, and that’s tap into the hundreds of millions in cash currently sitting in an account, waiting for a rainy day. But it’s raining now.

One needs only to listen to SUNY’s claims that budget cuts have created a crisis to realize an umbrella of aid is badly needed. After Senate Higher Education Committee Chairwoman Toby Stavisky wrote several letters of complaint, Zimpher reportedly gave her word to the Senator that she would release some of these funds. But she hasn’t yet, and if she does, keep your fingers crossed that it doesn’t go towards making her rich staff richer.

Bowing to public and legislative scrutiny, SUNY Chancellor Nancy Zimpher announced she and her top deputy would no longer pay themselves housing allowances totaling $150,000 per year, at a hearing before the State Senate Committee on Higher Education. Zimpher refused to withdraw raises recently awarded to three senior SUNY officials totaling $30,000 each, but announced she would rescind an offer for two of the officials to receive housing allowances, which would have amounted to $99,000 per year.

“As the Rolling Stones say, you can’t always get what you want,” Zimpher said at the hearing. “The decision comes from my belief that a big part of leadership is compromise.”

Zimpher had been called on the carpet by the Committee on Higher Education to answer questions after The Albany Times Union reported she had awarded $30,000 raises each to three top executives who were already making more than $200,000 each per year, in spite of deep funding cuts from the state that prompted Zimpher to furlough 221 SUNY central employees.

The Times Union also reported on multi-million dollar renovations currently underway at SUNY headquarters for “lavish” office suites for Zimpher and her team, citing unnamed SUNY insiders. The paper also publicized the Chancellor’s July decision to lay off a ten-member security team at SUNY’s Albany headquarters, despite an independent report indicating that the building would be unsafe and vulnerable without security guards.

Alarmed by the media reports, particularly in light of SUNY’s desperate pleas for greater autonomy, Higher Education Chairwoman Sen. Toby Ann Stavisky (D-Queens) and Sen. Kevin S. Parker (D-Brooklyn) called Zimpher to testify on September 24, along with Carl Hayden of the SUNY Board of Trustees and Monica Rimai, Zimpher’s top deputy and Chief Operating Officer for SUNY. Rimai came to SUNY in 2009 along with Zimpher from the University of Cincinnati, and Hayden had chaired the search for the new chancellor, which resulted in Zimpher’s appointment. Zimpher earns a salary of $490,000 per year and Rimai earns $325,000 per year; Hayden’s position on the board is unpaid.

Chancellor Zimpher with President Stanley

To quell concerns, Zimpher and Rimai announced at the hearing they would give up their yearly housing allowances of $90,000 and $60,000, respectively, and those savings would be used to fund the $90,000 in raises awarded this month to three top SUNY officials. The pay raises, recommended by Zimpher and approved on September 15 by the SUNY Board of Trustees, were awarded to John J. O’Connor, Johanna Duncan-Poitier and David Lavallee. The three officials, along with Rimai, make up Zimpher’s Executive Committee.

Duncan-Poitier began at SUNY less than one year ago in October 2009. She was formerly a senior deputy commissioner for the New York State Education Department. Zimpher appointed her to the post of Chancellor’s Deputy for the Education Pipeline, tasked with overseeing “cradle to college” initiatives by streamlining public education from kindergarten through college. In addition, she was recently appointed to be the Vice Chancellor for Community Colleges, and Zimpher testified that additional responsibilities deserved a $30,000 raise. Duncan-Poitier now makes $250,000 per year and has access to a university car.

O’Connor serves as the secretary of SUNY and the president of the SUNY Research Foundation. He was recently given the additional title of Senior Vice Chancellor for Research and Innovation. Zimpher testified that O’Connor would be tasked with overseeing SUNY partnerships with private corporations, warranting a $30,000 raise, bringing his new salary to $275,000. O’Connor had been offered a $39,000 housing allowance, which Zimpher rescinded at the hearing.

Lavallee was hired in 2009 as SUNY’s interim provost and was formerly the provost of SUNY New Paltz. Zimpher testified that SUNY could not afford to continue searching for a permanent provost, so Lavallee’s appointment has been extended for two more years. Zimpher said that he holds the additional titles of Senior Associate Provost and fills “several other positions” in the provost’s office. In addition, Zimpher said at the hearing that Lavallee was recently given even more responsibilities.

“I added to his agenda oversight of the SUNY Global Center and the Vice Chancellor for Global International Affairs, and I felt that I was asking this person to do more than one job,” Zimpher said. She felt that his numerous responsibilities warranted a $30,000 raise, bringing Lavallee’s new salary to $315,000. Records indicate that Lavallee had been receiving a $60,000 annual housing allowance since 2009, which Zimpher said would be revoked.

But SUNY already pays a Vice Chancellor for Global Affairs $180,000 a year, plus a $54,000 annual housing allowance. Records indicate that Mitch Leventhal was appointed to the post in September 2009 and came from the University of Cincinnati, along with Zimpher and her top deputy Rimai.

SUNY Admin Tower

SUNY officials did not respond to repeated requests for comment on the overlap in positions.

At the hearing, SUNY Board of Trustees Chairman Carl Hayden testified that the salary increases were discussed over two meetings of the SUNY Board of Trustees: the first occurred last May in an undocumented executive session; the second came this September, when the salary increases were approved.

The hearing also included discussion of a $3 million renovation project underway at SUNY headquarters, which unnamed SUNY sources have characterized as a lavish office makeover in Times Union reports.

“Although it pains me to dignify such sleaze by remarking on it, there is no Taj Mahal under construction at SUNY Plaza,” testified Hayden. He said the renovations are part of plan to bring obsolete infrastructure up to date, and that Zimpher is moving to the fourth floor of SUNY headquarters so “she and her senior leadership team can be together.”

A large portion of the hearing also focused on SUNY central’s July decision to lay off its ten-member security force. Sen. Stavisky produced an independent report of a security analysis performed in June by Linstar Security Systems, which said that getting rid of the security force would render the building unsafe and vulnerable. Rimai testified she was unaware of the report and Stavisky promised to provide her a copy.

“Since Chancellor Zimpher’s arrival, a pervasive culture of apathy and outright hostility towards security existed,” Robert Rogers, formerly the chief security officer at SUNY, testified at the hearing. He said he and his team were trained emergency responders and now, in their absence, the staff they used to protect could be vulnerable in the event of a situation requiring first aid, or even to invasions by protesters.

The committee demanded that SUNY officials provide several documents to back up their testimony, to be reviewed in coming weeks.

News of SUNY central’s spending decisions drew harsh criticism from legislators around the state, including here on Long Island.

“If you want to know why people are so upset with their government and why they have lost faith in so many of their institutions, you don’t have to look much further than this recent episode here at SUNY,” Sen. Kenneth LaValle (R-Port Jefferson) wrote in a statement that was read aloud at the hearing in his absence. “At a time when middle class families are doing more with less and other SUNY employees are being told to stay home and give back a portion of their pay each month, these raises have sent a terrible message.”

“These pay raises are unconscionable,” Assemblyman Fred Thiele (I-Sag Harbor) said in a statement. “SUNY, including Stony Brook, has again proven that they have become a top-heavy bureaucracy that is more concerned about preserving their own jobs than public higher education.”

Stony Brook spokeswoman Lauren Sheprow declined to comment on the hearing or on SUNY’s spending decisions.

With an enrollment of approximately 22,500 students on campus and a ratio of 24 students to every one faculty member, waste management is a major issue. One could argue that there is more trash on campus due to the surplus of students. But after facing millions of dollars in budget cuts, the pile of trash is not because of messy students but rather the decrease in frequency of trash pick-up around campus.

With this year’s $34 million budget shortfall, maintaining proper waste disposal and the changing of garbage cans has reached a heavy decline. President Samuel L. Stanley said, “Filling the gap cannot be done without cutting jobs.”

According to a Facilities and Services Department e-mail, trash pickup was not the only thing hurt by the budget cut. The cleaning of public spaces, classrooms and hallways by custodial services has been reduced to once a week, while the cleaning of offices, suites and cubicles has been diminished to once a month.

The amount of ground service cleaning has also decreased. Lawn mowing frequency, landscaping and street sweeping have been reduced in order to save money.

Throughout all of these cuts, Stony Brook has implemented a new solar trash compactor as a part of its green initiative, joining more than 650 institutions in initiating the development of a comprehensive plan to achieve climate neutrality. The university plans to achieve a 25 percent reduction in greenhouse gas.

The new trash cans, made by BigBelly Solar, compact approximately four to five garbage cans worth of waste into one. BigBelly, as advertised on its website, drastically lowers the operating costs, fuel consumptions and green  house gas emissions by up to 80 percent.  Self-powered and requiring no outside electricity to operate, the cans save on labor costs and are energy efficient.

There are currently solar trash compactors outside the SAC, the Javits Lecture Hall and the Student Union (which is located in the shade).

The cans, priced at roughly $4,000 each, help bridge the gap between the budget shortfalls by reducing the amount of attention that needs to be given to the changing of garbage cans. Though the vast majority of garbage cans still require frequent pick-ups, the introduction of the solar compactors will lead to a decreased need to maintain at least a few spots on campus.

These trash cans, which require fewer costs to maintain, are implemented to both manage the necessity of constant garbage changing while saving the University excess spending on custodial service.

President Stanley joins a growing list of university presidents who have spoken out in favor of the DREAM Act

Stony Brook University President Samuel Stanley joined the growing list of university presidents and administrators calling for the passage of the DREAM Act.

In letters to Senators Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C), President Stanley joins the presidents of the Universities of Buffalo and Rochester; Cornell, Fordham, Syracuse and New York Universities; and the chancellors of both SUNY and CUNY in calling for comprehensive immigration reform.

“We would…like to take this opportunity to affirm our strong support for federal legislation that would provide a pathway to legal residency—and remove barriers to higher education—for thousands of students who are not legal residents of this country, through no fault of their own,” reads the letter.

The Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act enjoys broad support among lawmakers and citizens alike. A poll released earlier this summer suggests that as much as 70 percent of the country favor the provisions included in the DREAM Act.

Those provisions include the creation of a pathway to citizenship for students who were brought to the United States as children and never received proper documentation. In order to obtain legal residency, students would be required to complete some college or enlist in the military, live inside the law, and pay a fine.

Additionally, the act would give states the freedom to offer in-state tuition to undocumented students, many of whom have lived in their home states for most of their lives. An ambiguous provision in a 1996 bill sought to outlaw benefits like lower in-state tuitions for undocumented immigrants, but 11 states, including New York, passed their own legislation that offered in-state tuition to immigrants if they met certain requirements.

“We urge you to include the bipartisan 2009 DREAM Act,” says the letter, signed by President Stanley and Chancellor Zimpher. “This legislation will correct an injustice perpetuated upon thousands of American students and ultimately will benefit our country.”

Time is not on the side of supporters of the DREAM Act. The bill is currently part of a larger comprehensive immigration reform bill that is, overall, much more contentious than the DREAM Act. Unless supporters find enough allies to bring DREAM to a vote as a standalone bill, it is unlikely to pass before the November midterm elections. And if the results of those elections go as expected, it’s unlikely there will be enough support in the next Congress to pass it at all.

But pressure to pass the DREAM Act is growing, as more and more outside voices lobby for action.

“It is the right thing to do and should be done now,” reads the letter.

Hundreds of students from Stony Brook Southampton, which is slated to close at the end of summer, organized an over 12-mile walk in protest of the administrative decision.

Armed with lawn chairs, guitars, signs, and outdoor games, over a hundred students sat on the grass in front of the West Campus administration building. The message “Save Southampton” could be seen on dozens of signs as many Southampton students shouted organized chants throughout the academic quad.

The protest attracted several news outlets such as News12 and Newsday. Every protestor wore a Stony Brook Southampton t-shirt or sweatshirt making their size in numbers easily noticeable. It was a peaceful but utter take-over of the main campus’ academic mall.

The march began at the Kohl’s shopping center on 346 route 25A, in Rocky Point at 7 a.m. and ended at Stony Brook University’s administration building at about 12:30 pm. Though the students were aware that this protest would prove futile, the strong will to fight the decision still existed.

After speaking with News12 and WPIX, Southampton student Nick Zanussi said in a brief interview, “My peers and I are willing to fight this until the end, but at the same time we realize we have to plan for the changes ahead and make sure we still get an education.”

When speaking to Stephanie Moracles, a sophomore at Southampton, and her teary-eyed mother Beth Moracles, both were heavily disheartened by the University’s decision. “I’ve lost my whole education, my dorm, my major, everything,” Stephanie said. “Now they’re asking me to start all over at a new school, none of it seems fair.”

University President Samuel L. Stanley made his final decision after cutting $25 million on the main campus and meeting with top administrators to cut another $33 million in the upcoming year, while inconveniencing the least number of students as possible.

Zanussi and four other student representatives met with Dr. Stanley after their arrival on the West campus to try and change his mind about closing most of the Southampton campus. But, their plea came after the university had made its final decisions.

Stanley said his administration has no choice but to shut down most of the Southampton campus, which only serves about 500 students, because it is inefficient and costs 2.5 times as much per person to run as the main campus. He said the closing would save about $6.7 million a year.

The funding cut is one of many desperate attempts made by administrators to keep costs below the new, heavily cut, budget.

Many students realize that the time to move on is now, but they vow to continue the fight against unfair budget cuts. “The situation sucks, but at this point we just want our voices heard,” added Southampton junior Thomas Faines.