, V The

Scarlet

8 Black

%%

 

:Off—campus fonding
allegations reexamined

Editor’s Note: Last week in the lront
page see article on ollrcampus limos,
our reporter lailed to directly interview
all parties concerned with the ins
vestieairon ol the handling ol oil.
eampus lunds, conducted by son
Treasurer Mark Nissen. Al the request
ol one ol those concerned, Bill Burke.

apology, Tee Price has rewritten
the articleihis week to explain all sides.
gimme Price had quoted Burke In last
eek’s article. the editorial stall was
unawareihaine had nottalked to him in
person, but had taken those ouotes out
ol the context ol the 5611 meeting. The
headline on that story was inaccurate
use, because it implied that the misuse
ollecampus ruhds was a laet.
However, the misuse is an allegation by
one person. see page lour lor Price‘s
apology,

ii

byTed Price

Off»campus representative Bill
Burke denied that he had con-
sciously misused offrcampus
funds, or converted them for
personal use. He admitted that the
funds had not received proper

(inviblicity and, as a result, he said,
i “There was defacto favoritism in
ten» disbursement.” Al Frey, the
other oil-campus representative
for students living in non college-
\iwned housing, denied any imr
-roprieties, but acknowledged a
tﬁack of publicity."

Burke, reacting to statements
made in an article written last
week, protested against con-
spiracy implications and indicated
that he had never been interested
in the disbursement of the monies.
He said he considered money
disbursement a “peripheral” issue
because he is more concerned
about his political responsibilities
as a Joint Board member,

«'SGA Treasurer Mark Nissen
agreed with Burke that there had
been defacto favoritism. “It may

"ve been from lack of publicity.
. by there was no publicity I don't
'noW. Maybe they (Frey and
Burke) kept remembering the
Memo on Tuesday morning, when
the deadline is Monday. Maybe

‘they remembered the Memo on
Monday morning and their triends
five minutes later, or the party that
John Doe is gonna have this
weekend, and decided not to ad-
vertise this week," Nissen saidl

Burke, who has approved seven
uests this year, for a total of
c .70, authorized his first request
after the initial publicity notice for
offrcampus funds appeared in the
November 25 Memo. He attributed
the lack of publicity, which he
‘1’med an “inexcusable thing,” to
his own personal disorganization.
Burke said he approved the
request of everybody who ap-
proached him. “I never told them
to ask me, and i never got any
money out of it,” he remarked.
Nissen agreed saying, “t don‘t
Mhink there was any intent on his
part to misuse funds."
Frey and Burke were elected

approximately five weeks alter the
start of the semester, and were
iniormed of their fiscal respon-
sibilities by Nissen and SGA
President Will Collins, “sometime
in October,” recalled Nissen.
Burke and Frey said, however,
that they could not rec'ollect
receiving fiscal information from
Nissen or Collins,

Frey has authorized ten
payments totalling $420.27 for the
197546 academic year, the books
Show He approved a payment of
$7.42 to himself which reimbursed
him for a liquor store purchase.
Frey called that reimbursement
“hardly an usurpation of funds.”
Neither Burke nor his roommates
have ever received reim-
bursements, Burke said.

Last year, Frey, an off-campus
representative, received five
reimbursements out of fourteen
issued second semester of the
academic year 197445. The five
reimbursements totalled $283.
according to the auditor’s records,
Frey said that nobody was ap
plying for the money, and he felt a
“responsibility" to see that it was
spent for social functions, Con»
sequently, he said he held large
parties at his house. two of which
he did not attend. He also used the
money to supply the oil-campus
softball team and their opponents
with beer during intramural
games.

Nissen said he began his ms
vestigation alter he received a
verbal complaint from Alice
Bernstein, an off-campus student
However, Bernstein denied ever
making an official complaint.

Bernstein, attempting to obtain
additional funds for an off-campus
party that was to be open to the
college community, approached
Mark Frankel, chairman of the
Initiative Fund Committee, for
money. Frankel told Bernstein that
he wanted to know the amount of
off»campus monies available
before he would supply her with
any funds, She then approached
Nissen, requesting the necessary
figures.

Nissen refused to give Bernstein
the figures unless an official
complaint was made. He told her,
“Those records are available only
to the treasurer of the
organization,” SGA Vice~President
Kathy Kramer expressed surprise
at Nissen's statement and said it
was Collins’ general policy to allow
anyone to examine the books, since
olicampus balances are similiar
to hall balances, which are open to
View by hall members. Collins was
unavailable for comment.

According to Nissen’s version,
Bernstein made her official
complaint at the 100 Days Party.
Nissen recalled that. “Bernstein
said Frankel was giving her a hard
time and then she went back and
said the off-campus people were
giving her a hard time. She said
she was upset that all they were
doing was having their own private

parties and stocking their own
liquor cabinets and she wouldn’t
care, but she wanted to have her
party, And i said, ‘Is this an ofti al
complaint, Alice?’ And she said,
‘uh,' she sort of stumbled. I said, ‘I
won’t do anything unless it’s an
official complaint.’ She says ‘Well,
OK then, if that's what it’s got to be
for you to help me out. it’s 0K.’ "

Bernstein denied ever making an
official complaint. “All I needed
was the list of funds," Bernstein
recalled. “I never mentioned an
investigation.” She continued. “It
Seems to me that he (Nissen)
wanted to make an investigation so
he heard it the way he wanted to.
He should be more careful."

Bernstein said she had no reason
for making a complaint because
Frey had been “helpful” in
procuring lunds for her party.
Frey appeared with Bernstein
before the Initiative Fund Com-
mittee, because he thought his
presence as an off-campus
representative might “give some
credence to her request."

When asked if he could subs
stanllate his account, Nissen
produced a letter from Frey
written in response to Nissen's
inquiry concerning the disbur»
sement and publicity of offrcampus
funds. The letter said, “In response
to Alice’s complaint of persons
using offrcampus funds to establish
their personal liquor cabinets all I
can say is what I told her.” Nissen
alleged that this scction of the
letter Showed that “she also
complained to Frey ” However,
Frey contended that he and
Bernstein had engaged only in a
“gener 1 discussion” about the
inequalities in the current system.

Frey said that Nissen had asked
him for a “statement of policy"
concerning the use of offrcampus
funds and that he had “absolutely
no idea” that Nissen was con»
ducting an investigation. Frey
commented that under the cir»
cumstances. Hit was a matter of
courtesy to approach me directly."

Bernstein admitted to having
doubts about the general structure
for disbursing offrcampus funds,
but denied having any complaint
with the way Burke and Frey
handled their duties, “Frey and
Burke have done a fine job," she
said. “They’ve given money to
whoever wanted it."

Nissen’s report, formally in
troduced at. last week’s SGA
meeting. was based upon research
compiled by Nissen and Andrew
Devlin, assistant student coor»
dinator.

The report included documen-
tation of ten reimbursements made
last semester, on record in the
student auditor’s office, Nissen
looked up the ten individuals who
lived at seven different addresses
in last year's phone book. In his
report, Nissen stated that Burke,
who had been in London,
authorized all the requests for
money made by former Grinnellr

In-London students. Frey, who
was othcampus last year, signed
for olfcampus people last year.
Nissen said. From this in-
formation, Nissen wrote in his
report that “a party group has
formed around last year's off-
campus and London people as a
close group oi friends "

Burke acknowledged that he
approved the requests of three
students first semester. Of those.
Burke said that two petitioners
were former GrinnellrInALondon
students, and were “not real close
friends.” Together, the three
receipts totaled $78.47.

According to Nissen's report.
Frey signed six requests, during
first semester for a total of $317.48.

Devlin and Nissen conducted a
phone survey of offrcampus
students not living in college-
owned housing. For research
purposes, they divided the students
into two groups: those who lived at
a residence that had received off-
campus monies (group 1), and
students who lived at addresses
which had not obtained any monies
(group 2)

Group 1. according to lesen’s
report, included 27 people. Twelve‘
people were contacted in this
group. Everyone, except one, knew
of at least two parties and had
attended from one to five of the
parties.

Group 2 consisted of 91 students.
of which 32 were interviewed.
Three of these people had heard of
oftvcampus parties and one of those
had attended one

A third group of 52 students was
cited in the report. None of these
individuals were contacted as their
phone numbers were not listed in
the directory. Nissen said, Nissen
wrote in his report that “control of
funds is kept by lack of information
on what they‘re for and how to get
them.”

“The survey wasn't biased"
even though nobody in group 3 had
been contacted, Nissen said.
Devlin, who was out of town, could
not be reached for comment
concerning the accuracy of the
survey.

Frey called the phone survey
“mildly inaccurate." He said not
enough offrcampus studenB had
been interviewed, He also won-
dered about the actual wording of
the questions. He speculated that
perhaps many students had been to
an off-campus party funded by
SGA, but were not aware of the
funding, Consequently, he said,
they would respond that they had
not attended any SGA funded
parties.

The student coordinator is now
responsible for the publicity and
disbursement of the funds as a
result of an SGA resolution
proposed by Nissen. The resolution
was adopted unanimously by Joint
Board members, including Burke.
Burke said he was glad to be
relieved of the responsibility as it
had been “a pain in the ass.”

Grinnell College
Grinnell, Iowa

3/5/76 Vol. 84, No. 21

Ruth Montgomery

Leader
elected

by Doug Schultz

Ruth Montgomery emerged as
the new SGA presidentelect tor
1976-77 in yesterday's runoff
election. She defeated her op-
ponent Pal Edmunds. Montgomery
received 352, or 68.6 per cent, of the
514 total votes, while Edmunds
received 162 votes for 31,4 per Cent.

Although she officially assumes
oiiice the day iollowing Com~
mencement. her job may begin
well before then. She said she will
begin accepting applications for
cabinet positions immediately so
that the new cabinet can work out
next year’s SGA budget with the
present cabinet by April 5.

The cabinet posts are secretary,
treasurer. auditor, student coor-
dinator, and social coordinator.

Montgomery said she intends to
work up ”realistic" job descrip~
tions of each cabinet position with
the present cabinet members. and
stuff mail boxes with the
descriptions in order to inform all
students of the nature of the offices
so that applicants will not be only
SGA members, cohorts or others
closely familiar with the offices
Montgomery said she could not
recall that this had ever been done
since she had been Grinnell.

Responding to cri cism during
her campaign concerning her lack
of self-assertiveness, she said “a
balance of assertiveness and calm
action is needed to be effective"
and that “I will be assertive when
it is needed, but on other levels, my
way of dealing with things is more
effective.“

She mentioned that one of her
strong points is a willingness to use
to a greater extent the initiative of
Joint Board and to incorporate a
variety of opinion in student
decisions.

In Tuesday‘s primary election no
candidate received a majority of
the votes. Of 684 votes cast, Ruth
Montgomery received 265 or 38.7
per cent. Pat Edmunds was the
runner-up with 154 or 22.5 per cent.
Rick DiBello, who came in lhird
With 139 votes or 20,3 per cent, was
eliminated from Thursday’s run-
off, There were 126 “abstentions”
and 2 voided ballots.

 

