The Claremont community brandished a new weapon against the proposed Keck Graduate Institute last Friday. A local citizen, Carol Gil, filed an initiative to turn the land between College and Mills Avenues into a conservation space where new building would be prohibited. The possibility that this initiative may come before local voters has led to a frenzy of activity on the part of student and community activists as they try to mobilize and register students to vote.

The initiative is now in the city attorney’s office where it is being reviewed and put into the form in which it would appear on the ballot. According to Gil, her goal in filing the initiative was to turn all undeveloped land north of the campuses into a conservation zone where no new building would be allowed. Rebuilding of the existing building s would be allowed and the owners could remove non-native and hazardous plants, such as poison oak, from the area. The initiative would also allow the restoration of native plants.

Gil feels that "there is the possibility for citizen input. The main reason that I filed the initiative is that the representatives are not going with the views of the majority. A small handful of people should not be able to push something through that the community doesn’t want." She believes that the citizens of Claremont will overwhelmingly agree with the proposed conservation space.

The approval of this initiative by Claremont voters would be a major setback for the Keck Graduate Institute, which is meeting with the Architectural Commission on November 22 to get the final approval for construction of the Institute on the eleven acres currently occupied by the Bernard Field Station. Many students and local citizens feel that Keck does not belong in Claremont for a number of reasons.

According to BFS supporter, Charles Cange ’02, Keck is tied to numerous industries such as Dupont, Monsanto, and Bayer, whom he alleges are "horribly unethical." Cange reported that Keck has ties to Monsanto, Bayer, and Dupont corporations, whom he alleges were responsible for the Bovine Growth Hormone, Agent Orange, and Napalm, respectively. None of these corporations was available for comment.

Another objection to the Keck Institute is that they do not plan to offer tenure to their faculty, which some protesters feel may create an environment of fear among the professorial community and discourage objections to any shady practices. Cange claims that certain professors at Harvey Mudd have already been harassed for speaking out against Keck. However, Cange was unwilling to provide any specific details to back up this allegation.

Another organization has recently formed and is calling itself H.A.N.K. (Humans Against Nefarious Keck). This is a community group that has staged a number of protests to demonstrate their views that KGI is bad for Claremont.

In spite of the anti-Keck sentiment that is coursing through Claremont, Gil claims that the initiative is not designed to thwart Keck, but merely to preserve what she considers to be one of the most sensitive pieces of land in Claremont.

"It could have been Immaculate Heart or the Dalai Lama who wanted to build there, and I still would have objected," she said. She feels that the institute and the college administrators have not adequately looked into other possible locations for the Institute. According to Gil, the colleges’ holdings are immense and there are many other possible building sites. She did not respond to the arguments that the land that currently houses BFS is the most ideal spot, economically and geographically, for the new institute.

Henry Riggs, president of the Keck Graduate Institute and source of the acronymic name of the most recent protesting organization, was not in a position to comment on the initiative at this time because he hadn’t yet had a chance to read the initiative.

This latest obstacle for the Keck Graduate Institute comes after a long string of protest, both against the loss of BFS and the arrival of Keck in Claremont. Up to this point, student sentiment has generally fallen with the protesters, but there has been little active student involvement. Cange estimates that there are currently, "between 35 and 50 students on the lists of the Friends of the Bernard Field Station and Students Against Keck." Friends of the Bernard Field Station are not officially endorsing this initiative at this time, but many Friends are participating actively in the initiative process.

The initiative is currently in the city attorney’s office, where it is being reviewed and approved. According to city attorney, Sonia Carvalho, her office received the Notice of Intent to Circulate an Initiative on Friday, November 5.

"We are currently in the process of evaluating what the city’s responsibilities are," said Carvalho. "Specific rules of the California election code apply."

Carvalho has been the city attorney since last June and this is the first initiative that has landed on her desk. The task of her office is to advise City Hall and prepare the ballot statement based on the notice filed by Gil. Her office has 15 to 20 days after receipt of the notice to evaluate and prepare the official ballot statement.

The initiative differs from a referendum in both content and procedure. A referendum is filed when citizens are objecting to existing laws, whereas an initiative is filed when citizens want to put a proposition on the ballot to do something new, such as create a conservation space. A referendum, once approved by the city attorney’s office, has to receive ten percent of the registered voters’ signatures within 30 days, while an initiative has 180 days to obtain 15 percent, or around 4000 signatures.

The fate of the recently filed initiative is heavily reliant on more student involvement. Once the initiative leaves the city attorney’s office, the sponsors will have 180 days to get the required 4000 signatures. Organizers are hoping to get about 1500 of these signatures from students, with 500 coming from Pomona.

A registration drive was held three weeks ago on Pomona’s campus. In order to sign on, students must be registered to vote in the municipality of Claremont. Both Gil and Cange are encouraging those who are registered to vote elsewhere to get involved by speaking out and educating the entire community. But there is a great deal of pressure for time. The Architectural Commission meets on November 22 to finalize approval for the building, and according to Gil, "Once building has begun, it’s too late–there’s no going back." This is why she feels that the city needs to take this issue slowly and carefully consider all alternatives and ramifications.