Twenty-three Pomona students have been served judiciary board charges for their part in last week’s protest over the future of the Bernard Field Station, according to Dean of Students Ann Quinley. The protests consisted of members of the Coalition for the Bernard Field Station blocking access to Claremont University Consortium’s (CUC) Pendleton Business building. Pitzer College has chosen not to pursue judiciary action against their involved students; three students at Scripps College have been charged, and will be tried at a hearing today.

The 23 Pomona students have been charged with violating Article II, sections 6 and 13 of the Student Code, which prohibit "failure to comply with the direction of college officials or law enforcement officers acting in performance of their duties...[and] conduct, which interferes with or prevents the normal operation of the college."

Charged students were called into Quinley’s office individually to have the charges explained. Each will be tried by a convening of the Judicial Board, which will determine the sanctions to be imposed.

Any prohibited conduct in the Student Code may be sanctioned by consequences ranging from community service to expulsion. These sanctions will be determined by the members of the J-Board and are based upon the severity of the infraction and the student’s previous judicial record.

On March 26, the first day of the lockdown, approximately 30 protesting students were served with "summary suspension notices" by CEO of CUC Brenda Barham Hill. The statements cited that students were violating CUC’s "disruption and response" guidelines. They warned that students that continued to block access to Pendleton Building would be placed on summary suspension and would be subject to arrest.

According to CUC guidelines for inter-campus infractions, students are to be tried for any violations at their home campus, regardless of the campus at which the infraction takes place. While Barham Hill had the authority under the CUC disturbance policy to both suggest suspension to a student’s home college and to arrest disturbing students, she did not have the authority to suspend any students.

"The purpose of [the suspension notices] was to put students on notice that their home campuses were being asked to suspend them," Pomona President Peter Stanley explained. "[The notices only] had the effect of signaling possible future measures. Students were not in fact suspended."

According to Coalition for BFS member and protestor Ruth Cusick SC ’03, Pitzer has chosen not to pursue charges against student protestors. This decision comes after the Pitzer faculty passed a resolution expressing its disagreement with the actions of Pitzer President Marilyn Massey and the CUC Board of Overseers regarding the protesting students. The resolution requested that the suspensions be rescinded and that students be allowed to attend classes until further actions are taken.

Pomona faculty have also proposed a faculty resolution, asking Stanley and Quinley to "exercise their authority to drop all Pomona College charges against Pomona students participating in this nonviolent, nondestructive act of civil disobedience." The proposed resolution also states that the faculty "go[es] on record that they respectfully disagree with and reject the manner in which the Officer of CUC responded to the student actions."

The resolution was distributed throughout the academic departments earlier this week and will be voted on at today’s faculty meeting.

ASPC President Brian Andrews also proposed a resolution to the student Senate in this week’s meeting, which took a negative stance on both the issue of building the Keck Graduate Institute on the BFS, and the charges that are being brought against student protestors. The Senate voted to pass the resolution, but only after deleting all parts addressing students and J-Board charges.

"[The rest of Senate] wanted to specifically address the issue of KGI on BFS, [but] some Senators weren’t sure that it was the Senate’s place to make a recommendation regarding J-Board to the administration," Andrews said.

"I felt that it was appropriate for Senate to take stand on issue of KGI on BFS and student protestors. The Constitution says that it is [the Senate’s] duty to express to the administration the student opinion on major issues…Personally I would have liked [us to take] some stand on J-Board, [but] I chair the Senate and have to go along with whatever they vote. I don’t even have a vote," he said.

Recently, an article in the Claremont Courier cited two anonymous sources as suggesting that KGI will likely never build on BFS. According to Stanley, President of KGI Henry Riggs has been quoted in the press as saying that the building will not happen in the near future.

In order to begin development of a Claremont campus, KGI leased some land on Indian Hill Boulevard and Arrow Highway a few years ago, which has become their "south campus." They are currently focusing their resources on developing this area.

"[KGI is currently] quite content with [its South campus]," Stanley said. "For the time being that’s all they can handle. They do want to retain their right to build on the land in the future, [but they have currently] withdrawn their plan to build from the City [Council]."