From: Sean W. Daly
Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:20 PM
To: Julie Marianne Wong
Cc: [REDACTED]
Subject: Request Regarding CU Police security fee Waiver
Dear Vice-Chancellor Wong,
I am writing to you on behalf of the Forbidden Education: The Rise of
Neo-McCarthyism event scheduled for March 5th at 7pm in the Glenn Miller
Ballroom. This letter is in regard to the SAFE meeting which occurred on
Tuesday, February 17, 2009, at 4pm in UMC 305, UCB. Specifically, I am
writing in reference to the extra costs required by the SAFE meeting as
necessary for confirmation of this event. We find the requirements for a
full patrol police security somewhat excessive and potentially impairing
to our financial ability to host the event. At an average of $65.00 per
hour, for 6 officers, for 6 hours, it comes to $2,340.00. It is my
understanding that there may have been some resolution of this issue
since the February 17, 2009 meeting. However, given that the University
has not provided us with any documentation on this issue, we would like
our position to be on record. Furthermore, we received an email which
seems to indicate that the CU Police plan to bill our group for the
event immediately afterwards.
We will not be making money from this event. The primary reason for
introducing ticket sales is to reimburse the sponsoring referendum
student groups for a small fraction of the costs associated with the
event. As of 4pm March 3rd only 84 tickets have sold. The excessive
security (CU Police) costs would not only prevent us from covering some
of our event costs, it also would require our groups to pay considerably
more than we have currently budgeted for event security, which is less
than $700.00. Our original budget estimate is on-file with the Student
Organization Finance Office. The additional police costs alone will
almost certainly count against any money we save from ticket sales, and
likely push the whole event over our current budget. While our student
groups have not heard anything directly from the top of the CU
administration regarding this event, and can only guess how their
motives would affect policy, it would seem to only help the case of CU
lawyers in the upcoming lawsuit if our student groups were to cancel the
event due to costs associated with unreasonably high security
requirements, resulting in less public attention to the issue.
Furthermore, the somewhat excessive costs for security is hindering our
ability to advertise for and put on the event, which we see possibly as
punishment and also threatening the event’s budget in such a way that
could be construed as a restraint of our speech, as we discuss bellow.
Derrick Jensen spoke on campus without any CU security staff for the
Student Environmental Action Coalition February 29th, of 2008. Dr.
William Ayers spoke on campus without any CU security staff December
14th 2006 for the 180 Degree Shift at the 11th Hour. Ward Churchill has
spoken in the Glenn Miller Ballroom several times, in addition to other
areas on-campus, sometimes without any CU security. At least on one
occasion, on February 8th 2005, the Administration security was provided
by City of Boulder Police without any fee. We do not believe that the
University should change the fee this time because it regards the
speaker as “controversial” or because all three are in the same room at
once.
Our reason for choosing the Glenn Miller Ballroom was partially
based on the fact that the University Memorial Center has a security
team that is effective, yet more affordable and less intimidating to the
public than regular CU police. We believe the presence of the UMC
security staff will be sufficient for the performance of necessary
security tasks such as checking bags and monitoring doors. We also have
8 volunteers who will be escorting our guests and providing a function
similar to security for the speakers themselves. For example, with one
security concern, our position, as was Ward Churchill’s in 2005, is that
our personnel have the capacity to escort our speakers to and from their
vehicles safely. We originally planned to have the Event in Glenn
Miller Ballroom to avoid CU Police security rates, by using UMC
security. Now, it seems, we will have both. Would we have been
required to have 14 CU Police (to make up for the lost 8-11 members of
the UMC security team) if this were held in a smaller venue (like Chem.
140) that does not have a local security team on campus?
We welcome free speech and a diversity of opinions. This
comports with the UMC’s Mission and Diversity Statement which states
that “[a]s the heart of campus, the UMC provides an atmosphere of
inclusiveness that allows for free and open exchange of ideas, as well
as the development of significant relationships and understanding
between all cultures in the university and the community at large.” The
appearance of this event to the media and the attendees is important not
only to the cause of academic freedom and critical thinking, but to the
image of CU as well. I am confused by the comments in Mark Heyart’s
previous email that the current projection of security cost, “does not
include what would ultimately be needed if protesters are
anticipated…”. I should think that leafleting and holding signs
should be encouraged, and not penalized, as it would contradict our
encouragement of and belief in free speech. We would like to avoid a
repeat of the media criticism from events at Florida State University
where protesters who were leafleting were escorted from the premises.
The removal of non- and minimally disruptive protesters would reflect
badly on the University of Colorado, portraying it as intolerant and
biased toward the left. Having additional security guards to handle
additional non-disruptive protesters seems to be meant to intimidate,
and not necessarily provide security, as those who would mean disrupt
the event would probably try to get into the event secretly and without
open criticism at first.
In a later email, Mark Heyart contradicts his early comments by
mentioning that his security allotment decision is also not based upon
the number of attendees present, and that the security was mainly
necessary for question and answer sessions, not outside protests in the
protest area.
Therefore, we believe that the presence of an entire patrol of
CU Police (in addition to the UMC security) would be expensive,
intimidating, and bad for public relations. First, we respectfully ask
that the number of CU Police be lessened, perhaps replaced by just a
couple of free City of Boulder Police if necessary. If full CU Police
presence is mandatory, contrary to the wishes of the student group
sponsors, organizers, and the speakers themselves, then it would be only
right that the CU Police cover their own costs from their own budget or
that the costs be covered by some other administrative budget source.
From what we gather, On April 29, 2008 former terrorists (Walid
Shoebat and Kamel Saleem) brought to CU by the College Republicans were
part of an event which did pay a CU Police fee. (I don’t know exactly
how much or how many CU Police that they had.) Now, they were funded
under the well-endowed Cultural Events Board (run by our student
government), but we are funded solely by student group money. Our
student groups have received our money from victorious referenda
campaigns and furthermore, because of various student-fee funding rules,
we are not allowed to use the Cultural Events Board to get money.
Furthermore, rather than a counter-example to our argument, the case
proves the point. The CU Security fees were increased according to the
level of controversy, which has no legal justification. Since student
groups are hosting the event, using student fees to cover all expenses,
the CU Police are actually charging on top of the normal fees that are
taken from student tuition, parking fees, and tax dollars, to cover
police protection for every other day of the year that they are on duty.
We would appreciate a response to this letter at your earliest
convenience, and look forward to further discussing this issue and
planning a safe and constructive event together.
With Respect,
Yours Earnestly,
– Sean Daly
Senior History Major, Undergraduate
Students for True Academic Freedom
The 180 Degree Shift at the 11th Hour
Student Environmental Action Coalition
Download file "Appeal of Security Fee"
Schools: University of Colorado at Boulder Cases: University of Colorado at Boulder: Prohibitive Security Fee Charged for Controversial Speakers