14 Thursday, September 28, 2000 Concerns™ comments about our coverage? contact the ombudsman at ombudsinaiminc.edu or call 9334611. Kelli Boutin EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR Kim Minugh UNIVERSITY EDITOR Ginny Sciabbarrasi CITY EDITOR Board Editorials Our Right to Know Tonight's open Honor Court hearing is a unique opportunity. But it only reinforces the need for all cases to be open to the public. Tonight, something quite rare will take place at UNC: There will be an open under graduate Honor Court hearing at 6 p.m. in 111 Carroll Hall. But this open case is only a small step in the right direction. The Honor Court should always be open to the public. The Honor Court is extremely important to the University and the community as a whole. Aside from hearing cases involving academic infractions, the court can hear cases involving forgery, sexual assault and weapons and drug possession. The public has a right to know when crim inal activity and academic dishonesty is tak ing place in its community. As such, the public has a right to know what goes on in the Honor Court. Despite the court’s importance, students know little about its operations because most cases are tried behind closed doors. That’s due to a provision in the federal Family Education Right to Privacy Act that allows Honor Court cases to be classified as “educational records,” thus keeping them closed to the public. But considering the importance of the Court, secrecy is not in the public’s best interest. The Honor Court is responsible for enforcing the Code of Student Conduct, which comprises the Honor Code and the Campus Code. In short, it is responsible for upholding the integrity of the University. Give and Take As the UNC Master Plan begins to take shape, communication between town and University leaders is essential. When two governing bodies are at odds, communication is key. University and local leaders have been learning this lesson. And as the town and UNC continue to grow, both sides will have to bend a little to produce the optimal out come. For instance, communication between town and local leaders this week led to a rejection of a proposed transportation corri dor that would run through two town neigh borhoods. Residents complained the corridor would tear up the Westside and Westwood neigh borhoods near the Horace Williams tract. After hearing their objections, the University agreed to delete the proposed cor ridor from the Master Plan, a blueprint for the future development of the campus. By responding to the concerns of town res idents, the University has shown that it can be flexible. It is not a monster seeking to destroy everything standing in its path. Now, the town must be as willing to respond to the University’s needs as the cam pus grows and begins to implement its Master Plan. Trying to push students toward campus and out of residential neighborhoods, as a recent proposal outlined, is not a way to pro- Readers' Forum Reduced Spending, Not Bond Referendum, Needed for Universities TO THE EDITOR: All issues have two or more sides. However, The Daily Tar Heel has been presenting only one side of an issue that they claim critical to the future of the state - the impending bond referendum. Clearly, there cannot be such one-sided support for an issue of this magnitude. Countless articles have been printed pro moting the bond and offering publicity to groups supporting it. There are .59 community colleges along with the 16 universities that receive funds from the bond. These colleges do not receive proportional funds to UNC, which receives roughly one-sixth of the funds from the bond. Such inequity is frightening. Many of the people who attend community college are lifelong residents of the state who work in state benefiting our economy. Many of our own students move away after graduation, abandoning the N.C. economy. Those peo ple who remain here should reap equal Matt Dees EDITOR Office Hours Friday 2 p.m. -3 p.m. Kathleen Hunter STATE St NATIONAL EDITOR T. Nolan Hayes SPORTS EDITOR Will Kimmey SPORTSATURDAY EDITOR Students and members of the University should have the opportunity to see how this body, to which between $9,000 and SIO,OOO of student fees are paid, functions and carries out its responsibilities. The only way an Honor Court hearing currendy can be opened to the public is if the defendant specifically requests it. There have been attempts in the past to open the Honor Court. In 1998, the North Carolina Court of Appeals ruled in a lawsuit involving The Daily Tar Heel and the Honor Court that the Honor Court, though a pub lic body, did have the right to close its hear ings under FERPA. But a 1993 decision by the Georgia Supreme Court found that student judicial proceedings in that state were not educa tional records covered by FERPA. Clearly, the broad term “educational records” needs to be clarified by federal leg islators to exclude student judicial proceed ings from the protection of FERPA. The Honor Court embraces the ideal of student self-governance. Yet the very stu dents it protects and serves are barred from its hearings. Asa public body, at a public institution, it should be open to the public. Tonight’s open meeting is a rarity. Students have the chance to get a glimpse of the Honor Court in operation. Don’t squander the opportunity - it does n’t come around often. mote positive relations between the town and UNC. As the University begins to realize its Master Plan, it will be forced to adapt to increased enrollment and the need for class room space. Such changes inevitably will require the campus to grow. The town should understand that the University must grow and should not attempt to stop all development the University wishes to undertake. This is not to say that town residents should have no say in what the University does as it expands. The University has a responsibility to hear out the complaints and concerns of area res idents and factor their responses into its plans for development. Meetings between University and local officials -and town residents - allow both sides to state their case. Wednesday night’s public hearing, where the Master Plan was discussed, was a good start. But it’s just that -a start. The Master Plan will be a long, drawn out ordeal. By keeping the lines of communica tion open between all parties involved early, it ensures that things will proceed as smooth ly as possible into the future. benefit from the bond. In its present form, they do not. The administration speaks about contin gency plans if the referendum were to fail. All ignore the most obvious option for rais ing revenue - cutting spending. The great bureaucracy that is the University could be drastically reduced. Institutions that are used infrequendy by the majority of stu dents, such as the Johnston Center, could have saved the University millions. Those millions, dutifully applied, could have increased the number of professors, increased the amount of pay for University employees and provided hinds for future growth. No one has yet to offer a plan based upon the idea of cutting spending. I am for the growth of education in North Carolina. However, special privilege and reckless spending do not warrant a bond that would put the state in debt. The debt would even tually be paid off, not by many UNC-CH graduates, but more so by other institutions within the state. Keith Cloer Freshman History and Political Science Opinion