Matt Weir / The Collegian

More than 200 students, faculty and staff gathered in the Peace Garden Tuesday afternoon to discuss their demands with California State University, Fresno President John D. Welty.

The first part of the meeting was set up as an open forum debate between President Welty and the public. Representatives from student organizations sat at a table with Welty and Mauro Carrera, who served as the moderator for the event.

These representatives posed questions to Welty based on a list of demands that was given to the administration during the walkout two weeks ago.

The representatives and Welty were each given five minutes to make their initial statements regarding each demand. Then each side was allowed a three-minute rebuttal, with Welty having the last word.

Welty agreed to address each demand individually, and decide whether or not he could approve it.

Carrera said that if Welty needed consultation on a specific demand, he could discuss it with officials and give a final answer on November 13.

The second portion of the meeting was an open question and answer session, with the floor open to anyone who wanted to address Welty.

The majority of the questions posed by the audience dealt with the finances of the university, as well Welty’s personal finances.

“Not everything is transparent,” said ASI senator Jamie San Andres. She expressed a desire for Welty to open up more information to the public.

Matt Weir / The Collegian

The documents San Andres wanted included budget books with information on the Save Mart Center and Campus Pointe.

Welty said that while Campus Pointe does sit on campus, the property has been leased out to private developers and their budget books are not the property of the university. He also said the university goes through an annual audit of the books.

San Andres called for Welty’s support of the bill AB 656, which would tax oil production in California and use the profits to support higher education.

Welty said that he did not fully support the bill in its current state.

He said in order for AB 656 to be effective, there would need to be a provision guaranteeing that money from the bill would be in addition to already established government funding. Otherwise, AB 656 could potentially be used to replace existing funding, thus raising no additional money for higher education.

San Andres also asked Welty to justify his pay raise in 2007, which brought his salary up to $299,000, as well as his free housing and travel perks.

Welty responded that salaries across the university are lower than the national average. He also stated that salary decisions were not his to make.

“The compensation paid to the presidents is determined by the board of trustees,” Welty said.

In addition, Welty said the house that the university provides for him does not cost the university any money because it was donated. The house is used for community purposes as well, according to Welty.

In her rebuttal, San Andres asked Welty a series of questions.

“Will you cut your salary by $52,000? Will you ask Chancellor Reed to cut his salary? Will you give up free travel?” San Andres asked.
Welty responded to each of the questions.

“The question with regard to my salary, the answer is no,” Welty said. “The question with regard to asking Chancellor Reed to cut his salary, the answer is no.”

Welty also said that he does not receive free travel, but is reimbursed for business trips in the same way other staff and faculty are reimbursed.

Senior finance major, Yusuf Nasir, said he took issue with the administration’s lack of human emotion.

Nasir wants to see that Welty, along other administrators, feel students’ pain.

“Come down on our level and be with us. Protest with us for a while,” Nasir said.

Dr. Elizabeth Swearingen, a women’s studies professor at Fresno State, also wanted to see Welty make more of an effort to see the students face-to-face.

“I think the president is using public relations speech,” Swearingen said. “He’s not 
addressing the students at the level of the student’s concerns.”

Swearingen, who says she will be laid off in the Fall of 2010 due to budget cuts, felt that Welty’s responses to the students were condescending. She said that Welty probably assumed the students would attend the meeting uninformed, and she felt that it reflected in his answers.

“It’s very easy to say I will consider and take under advisement and then I’ll make that 
decision,” Swearingen said. “That isn’t participatory at any level.”

Nate Chang, an undeclared freshman, said he thinks it is unfair to hold Welty responsible for the actions of the state.

“One man can’t change the whole world, or even our entire campus,” Chang said. “It would be against what our democracy stands for if one person had that much power.”

As far as students who are struggling, Chang said they should not expect handouts.

“If you want it bad enough, you’re going to get it,” Chang said, referring to higher education.

Fourth year business administration major Jeannette Escalante agreed. Escalante was one of the few students who used the platform to ask critical questions of the protestors.

Escalante felt that many of the things Welty was charged with were simply not in his control. She also questioned the activists’ intentions.
“”What’s their motivation? Do they want to make a change, or do they just want to attack [Welty]?” she asked. “You should be trying to work with him, not attack him.”

Nasir agreed that Welty may be taking steps toward fixing the problem, but he isn’t satisfied.

“[Welty] may be doing some things, I don’t want to underscore that, but it’s not enough.” Nasir said.

Additional reporting by Brian Maxey and Thaddeus Miller