Amid Boston Overdose Crisis, a Pair of Harvard Students Are Bringing Narcan to the Red Line
At First Cambridge City Council Election Forum, Candidates Clash Over Building Emissions
Harvard’s Updated Sustainability Plan Garners Optimistic Responses from Student Climate Activists
‘Sunroof’ Singer Nicky Youre Lights Up Harvard Yard at Crimson Jam
‘The Architect of the Whole Plan’: Harvard Law Graduate Ken Chesebro’s Path to Jan. 6
The Administrative Board has narrowed consideration of punishment of those who were involved in the Paine Hall sit-in to two possibilities.
A member of the board revealed yesterday that the two possibilities are to place on probation all those who had their bursar's cards taken, or to suspend those who were involved in both the Dow demonstration of last year and Paine Hall and place the rest on probation. The source revealed that there are about eight Harvard undergraduates who were involved in both Dow and Paine Hall.
Dean Glimp, however, said last night that the Ad Board has made no decision limiting its possibilities at all. "We have carefully avoided any decision until we have had the chance to examine each case individually," he said.
The Ad Board will present its decision on punishment to the Faculty at its meeting Tuesday. Before the Faculty votes on punishment, however, it will consider the question of who should be present at Faculty meetings. Dean Ford said he placed the topic on the docket because he felt that there was some question about the matter and that there should be some discussion on it. He did not speculate whether or not there would be any formal motions on it or whether the Faculty would act on the matter on Tuesday. "No matter what happens, however, students will not be permitted in the meeting on Tuesday," he said
Stanley H. Hoffmann, professor of Government, said yesterday that he did not anticipate any action on attendance at Faculty meeting on Tuesday. "There has been no effort to coordinate action. I can imagine 25 different proposals. It will probably be referred to a committee," he said.
There were some indications that there might be a motion to adjourn the Faculty meeting before it acts on punishment. This would give the various factions time for discussion of the Ad Board proposal.
Stanley L. Cavell, Walter F. Cabot Professor of Aesthetics and the General Theory of Value, Michael Walzer, associate professor of Government, John Womack, instructor in History, Mary K. Tolbert '69, secretary to the HRPC, and Timothy Gould '69 issued a statement yesterday calling for "either no punishment or a postponed decision until the community has had a chance to re-structure its procedures for making decisions in an atmosphere of tolerance and reason." Walzer said last night that he did not know whether there would be a motion for postponement or not. "It all depends on what the Ad Board does. One of us may move postponement but at the moment all there is the statement," Walzer said.
Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.