State College Borough Council encouraged Monday the concept of a Penn State student liaison, but did not endorse a proposal for a non-voting student seat on the council.
‘I think there’s a lot of merit in’ appointing a liaison to represent student interests and share borough information with the University Park Undergraduate Association, said Ron Filippelli, the council president.
At a council work session, he told Christian Ragland, the UPUA president, that ‘I don’t think we’re that far apart.’
Ragland has proposed the eventual inclusion of a non-voting student seat on the Borough Council, a measure that he said has already taken shape in four Big Ten host towns: East Lansing, Mich.; Lincoln, Neb.; Iowa City, Iowa; and Bloomington, Ind. Ragland said a non-voting seat would help enhance students’ role as stakeholders in the community, strengthen communication between town and gown, and help foster a better sense of local community among undergraduates.
Under Ragland’s proposal, the UPUA would move in three phases. First, it would appoint an official contact for communications with council; that person would attend all council meetings.
Next, the UPUA would make a concerted effort to encourage students to apply for the volunteer, appointed positions on the borough’s authorities, boards and commissions. Members of those groups generally serve at the pleasure of council and often advise council members on key issues. The borough has struggled in the past to gain student recruits for those positions, though a relative handful have served in recent years.
Finally, under the Ragland proposal, if council were comfortable with the idea, elected members could appoint a non-voting student member to the council. The non-voting member would attend all meetings and work sessions and be particularly visible in the community, Ragland said.
He suggested the council could choose the non-voting member with input and recommendations from the UPUA.
While council member Peter Morris said he supports Ragland’s pitch, others were more reserved. They said that they encourage students to take a more proactive role in applying for authority, board and commission seats, and that they would welcome a student liaison from the UPUA.
But from a legal and philosophical standpoint, they aired reservations about a non-voting council seat. Filippelli said he opposes the concept, explaining that ‘I don’t think it’s appropriate. Borough Council members are elected and represent all the citizens.’
Council member Tom Daubert said he thinks anyone who’s appointed to represent student interests ought ‘to be someone who cares about the Borough of State College, not someone who wants to push an agenda from the HUB.’ Any appointment should avoid purely political climbers, Daubert said.
Morris, meanwhile, said that ‘I just can’t oppose this (non-voting-seat proposal) as a matter of principle. Speaking democratically, it seems to be a natural thing to do.’
Ragland thanked the council for hearing the pitch. He said he will look more at operations in Big Ten towns with non-voting student representatives and return to Borough Council for more discussion. He also said he will look to focus specifically on student involvement in the borough’s authorities, boards and commissions.
In other business Monday night, the council voiced reluctance over a request from the borough Human Relations Commission. The commission, formed in 2007, has sought a broadening of its role so that it can hold occasional public meetings and invite ‘people to discuss issues of diversity,’ commission Chairman Charles Dumas said.
Dumas said the meetings could yield advisory memorandums for council’s consideration.
But council members voiced concern that such diversity meetings could turn the commission into an advocacy body — a role that may compromise its primary role as an adjudicator, council members said.
The commission was established to hear complaints filed under the borough Anti-Discrimination Ordinance, established in 2007; however, the commission has yet to hear any complaints, according to the borough.
The local ordinance bans discriminatory behavior in employment practices, particularly with regard to gender identity and sexual orientation. Those characteristics are not covered under state and federal anti-discrimination legislation.
Council member Don Hahn was among those who voiced concern about the legal implications of altering the Human Relations Commission’s charge. Still, he also commended Dumas for stepping forward.
‘It’s certainly been my experience in this community that a lot of discrimination does occur,’ Hahn said. ‘Unfortunately, there’s been little more than lip service done.’
He said the State College Area School District’s anti-discrimination policy ‘has been violated so many times with very little consequences.’
The council agreed to seek input from the borough solicitor, Terry Williams, concerning the Human Relations Commission matter. In the meantime, borough Manager Tom Fountaine said, the borough can facilitate a meeting among the Human Relations Commission, the Community Diversity Group and the Centre County Advisory Committee to the state Human Relations Commission.
Fountaine said the borough staff has recommended more collaboration among the groups. The state Human Relations Commission documented 23 employment-related discrimination complaints from Centre County in the 2007-2008 reporting period, according to an annual report. It’s not immediately clear which of those are from State College borough.
Earlier coverage: State College Council To Hear Student-Representation Pitch
