The University Board of Visitors approved a 2.5 percent increase in tuition for most entering in-state students and a 3.5 percent increase for most entering out-of-state students during Friday’s closed meeting. The Board also discussed plans for increased security protocol on Grounds.
These specific increases will impact students in the College of Arts and Sciences and the Curry School of Education, and the percentages will vary for students in different schools of the University. The weighted average increase across all schools will be at 3.3 percent for in-state students and 3.9 percent for out-of-state students.
“That blend of rates among schools and among classes supports the University’s key priorities: a commitment to maintain affordability for Virginians, but also a recognition that significant investments are necessary to ensure the quality of the educational experience overall and to address strategies and specific needs at the school level,” University Spokesperson Anthony de Bruyn, said in a news release.
In light of these modifications, the University will still keep “its commitment to meet 100 percent demonstrated financial need of all undergraduate students,” de Bruyn wrote.
Efforts like the Bicentennial Scholars Fund and the Cornerstone Grant, along with the University’s cap on loans, have allowed the University to expand diversity. Since 2012, first-year minority student enrollment has increased by 38 percent, African-American enrollment of first-year students has increased by 41.5 percent. This year, the University received applications from 2,271 African-American students — an increase of 600 students when compared to 2012, the release read.
In addition to the tuition increases for incoming students, the Board also passed a $101 tuition increase for all regular-session students, which will go towards University Transit Service, filling accessibility needs across Grounds and increasing art offerings.
The Board also discussed changes and improvements in the University’s security policy.
In a separate news report detailing security recommendations, de Bruyn said the University could make several potential improvements following a review conducted by Margolis Healy & Associates, a private security firm hired by the University after the events of Aug. 11 and 12. The review was presented to the Board Friday.
“U.Va. invests substantial time, energy, personnel and resources in making this community as safe as it possibly can be. It’s our top priority,” said Pat Hogan, executive vice president and chief operating officer. “This independent evaluation affirms our commitment and, just as important, provides recommendations for how we can do a more comprehensive job. We look forward to implementing those enhancements.”
One such recommendation made by Margolis Healy is to consolidate the University Police Department, security operations and systems, the Office of Safety and Emergency Preparedness and the Office of Environmental Health & Safety, so they all report to the University’s chief operating officer.
Additional security increases include a greater emphasis on collaborating with the rest of the Charlottesville community, developing a strategic engagement plan and centralizing the management of security systems and security considerations for buildings and other University facilities.
This follows recommendations that have already been put in place at the request of a Working Group formed by University President Teresa Sullivan as a response to the events of Aug. 11 and 12.
These changes include extending the University Ambassadors program, utilizing MSA Security more for larger events including “A Concert for Charlottesville,” the Bicentennial Launch Weekend and the Lighting of the Lawn and implementing clear bag policies and metal detectors, de Bruyn’s release read.
The Buildings and Grounds Committee of the Board of Visitors met Thursday to discuss several proposed projects at the University. Chief among them was the proposed softball stadium that would replace Lambeth Field.
In response to concerns about the project raised by several students and nearby residents, the Board did not vote on the site of the stadium and instead agreed that more study and work is needed before making any concrete decisions about the design and construction process. The Committee did approve the selection of VMDO architects for the project.
Currently, the softball stadium is isolated — it is located over a mile from the the main hub of athletics at The Park at North Grounds. Moreover, the topography of the site and the surrounding wetlands bar the University from hosting postseason games.
Virginia softball Coach Joanna Hardin was present at the meeting and spoke about the benefits a new facility would bring to the program.
“The history of our program has been one of struggle,” Hardin said. “We don’t have an identity and we struggle to be relevant. Our facility has significant, significant challenges … The distance from central Grounds and the athletic footprint ... It gives the perception of irrelevance and unimportance.”
Hardin said that 24 of the top 26 softball programs in the nation have facilities “within the athletic footprint,” which allows for more traffic and interest in softball.
Another issue Hardin cited was the potential threat to athletes’ saftey that the location of the current stadium harbors.
“We get a lot of visitors and a lot of unwelcome guests at times that converge upon our facility,” Hardin said.
Hardin does not allow players to use the field at night because of the dangers posed by the long commute on foot from the parking lot to the stadium in a heavily wooded area.
Hardin said that the new state-of-the-art facility would help propel the softball program into national competitiveness and ensure Title IX adherence.
Students — mainly Lambeth Field Apartment residents — are concerned about the proposed site of the stadium. The Board focused on the three major complaints, with the first being the loss of students’ use of Lambeth Field. This Board did not fully address this concern, and members agreed to discuss when and how non-student-athletes will be able to use the softball field in three months when they convene again. Moreover, the Board is considering the addition of another green space where the parking lot in front of the Lambeth Field apartments is currently located, and confirmed that there will still be pathways to access Rugby Road if the softball stadium is built on Lambeth Field.
Secondly, students are concerned that a new green space would lead to a loss of parking availability near the Lambeth apartments. No concrete solutions for this issue were given, though the Board agreed that something will be done to alleviate this concern if the proposition comes to fruition.
Lastly, the Board discussed the potential for the noise and lights from the stadium to be disruptive to Lambeth residents. In response, Hardin said that softball games do not go past 9 p.m., and there are no night practices. Furthermore, the University staff is looking into new lighting technology that will only light the field, without any spillage to the residential area, and new noise distribution technology that would minimize the noise heard by people not sitting in the bleachers.
The Board will meet again in three months with more comprehensive proposals that include compromises between the affected parties.
Other matters discussed at the meeting included the selection of the architect to renovate Alderman Library and the expansion of the Student Health and Wellness Center by an additional 60,000 square feet. The Board also discussed potential of reassigning Cobb Hall as another building for the McIntire School of Commerce to accommodate its growing spatial and academic needs as well as the renovation of the President’s house at Carr’s Hill to correct longstanding structural problems.
Additionally, the Board discussed at length a proposal for the creation of a new Contemplative Sciences Center on the Dell parking lot located in front of Ruffner Hall. The project has a budget of $53.3 million, and will have four general uses.
First, it can be used as an academic building with learning studios and classrooms in a two-story immersive learning wing. Second, as a student building that will offer space to socialize and study. Third, as a research laboratory, and last, as a space for interdisciplinary study and collaboration between the University’s 11 schools.
The Contemplative Science Center will draw inspiration from the Dell and the surrounding environment.
“The idea of the building is that it is more solid and more brick as it faces Ruffner and Bavaro Halls and then opens itself up to the landscape of the Dell and much more of a garden facade,” University Architect Alice Raucher said.
The Board voted to advance the planning of these propositions.
The University Board of Visitors Finance Committee endorsed a proposal Thursday to increase tuition rates for the 2018-19 school year. For most undergraduate schools, the Board voted to support a 2.5 percent raise for returning in-state students and 3.5 percent for out-of-state students. The full Board will vote Friday on whether to implement the tuition increases.
The University's in-state tuition will be the third-highest of state schools in Virginia behind William and Mary and Virginia Military Institute.
The increases vary across schools between 2.5 and 17.5 percent.
Outside the Rotunda, a group of about 30 students protested the increase by reading statements aloud that expressed their disagreement with the proposal. The protest was organized by the Black Student Alliance, Minority Rights Coalition, UFUSED and the University’s chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.
According to the Facebook event, the protest was meant to inform the Board of students’ opinions of the proposed increases and how those increases would affect African-American and Latinx families.
“I understand that there needs to be a commitment to people in the state because it’s a public university but I love this school as much as anyone else,” one of the protesters, an out-of-state student, said at the protest. “I can barely afford that as it is.”
With recent consecutive increases in tuition each year, some students expressed concerns about when such increases will end.
“Where exactly does it stop?” another protester said. “Is it in 10 years when I don’t even attend this university?”
Entering in-state undergraduates in the College and the Curry school will see a tuition increase of $334. Out-of-state undergraduates in these schools will see an increase of $1,530.
Tuition for in-state students entering the Architecture school will increase by $1,334 and $2,530 for out-of-state students. However, a $500 fee for these students will be eliminated.
In-state students entering the Nursing school will see tuition increase by $2,334. The increase for out-of-state students will be $3,530. The Nursing school faces the largest tuition increases out of all schools.
Tuition for the Engineering school will increase by $1,436 for in-state students and $2,674 for out-of-state students.
Entering undergraduates in the Batten school will see a tuition increase of $2,128 for in-state students and $3,378 for out-of-state students.
In-state students entering the Commerce school will see a tuition increase of $2,962, and tuition will increase by $4,212 for out-of-state students.
Melody Bianchetto, University vice president for finance, said this will be the third-consecutive year the increase is below the inflation rate, a goal the committee has been very intentional to keep.
The finance committee also voted to raise fees by a total of $110, including a $101 raise in student health fees in order to meet the growth of Student Health and Wellness. However, Bianchetto noted this is the second consecutive year there will not be an increase in athletic fees.
Bianchetto said these raises in tuition are due to addressing clinical requirements in the medical-oriented schools and working to recruit and retain faculty members. In order to keep the balance between affordability and excellence, the Board sees these changes as necessary.
Bianchetto stressed the University’s commitment to meet 100 percent of students’ need in financial aid, so as the tuition goes up, so does the financial aid.
Bianchetto said the University is implementing more outreach programs to low-income high schools and to first- and second-year students interested in applying to the Batten and Commerce schools. These programs will help inform prospective students of what University President Teresa Sullivan called University’s “generous financial aid package.” Additionally, the University has seen more early acceptances, allowing the financial aid office to distribute financial aid packages quicker.
Maurice Jones, Board member and finance committee member, questioned how this increase would affect the diversity in the student population. John G. Macfarlane III, Board member, finance committee member and chairman of the committee on the University’s College at Wise, referenced increases in the past years, showing a sizable increase in both African-American applicants and enrolled students, as well as increases in other minority students, first-generation students and students requesting financial aid over the past few years.
Additionally, the Board voted to support the finance committee’s request for authorization for capital investments in the University Foundation. Patrick Hogan, executive vice president and chief operating officer of the University, said the Foundation has “maxed” its funds and needs these additional investments to continue Unversity projects such as the Brandon Avenue master plan, Emmet/Ivy corridor, North Research Park and Ivy Gardens Apartments. The Board agreed investments shall not exceed $100 million.
Hogan proposed the financial plans for the Student Health and Wellness Center and McIntire School of Commerce Academic Facility, which entails renovations to Cobb Hall. Board member and Finance Committee Chairman James B. Murray, Jr. said this plan’s approval was crucial, considering the need to reassure an anonymous donor of $15 million to Student Health that the University plans to move forward on the project. The Board voted to support the financial plans for both facilities.
The Board heard reports about ResearchUVA, which recently adopted the program “Juice.” The program allows the University to track grant proposals submitted, enabling the administration to see what types of grants are awarded and where their greatest progress is.
Hogan closed with few remarks informing the Board of topics to be discussed in the May meeting, including cost estimates of the expansion of residential halls and offering housing to all second-year students.
The Board of Visitors Committee on the University of Virginia’s College at Wise met Thursday morning to discuss the College at Wise’s $14.8 million “Envisioning 2020” plan as well as recruitment and branding efforts. The plan released last month details the College at Wise’s proposals to bring on 110 more faculty and staff, increase student recruitment, add new undergraduate and graduate programs and earn accreditation for the school’s business program.
The committee heard a presentation on the plan, but did not take any votes on it Thursday.
“I thought [the plan] was important because numbers were thrown out there, 15 million dollars, and we’d like to see U.Va. Wise do x, y and z, have graduate programs,” said Donna Henry, chancellor of the College at Wise. “We really put together what are the things that we’ve been thinking about and put that together as a plan to order a response.”
The plan is asking for $14.8 million from Virginia Governor-Elect Ralph Northam (D) after he proposed to expand the College at Wise during his campaign.
“Our current budget, even though we are about two times larger than we were ten years ago … is level to where we were 10 years ago,” Henry said.
Henry also said that the College at Wise is more similar in demographics to minority-serving schools. Sixty percent of Wise students are first generation college students, and half of the 82 percent of students with financial aid have zero family contributions, according to Henry.
“When you look at the minority serving institutions, they have stuff in the budgets to cover that,” she said. “We’re a different institution, we serve a population that's not being served by other institutions in a big way.”
This past fall, the College at Wise missed its 350-student freshmen enrollment goal and enrolled about 300 students instead. John G. Macfarlane III, a Board member and chair of the U.Va. College at Wise Committee, suggested collecting data on which competing schools, particularly in southwest Virginia, have specific programs that could draw students to those schools rather than the College at Wise.
“What programs are they offering that we’re not going to be able to compete with them? What are some of the programs where we’re highly competitive with them, so we can figure out where our niche might be?” Macfarlane said. “We’re competing with online [colleges] as well, but we've got to figure out strategically what’s the best way to address that.”
Although the College at Wise did not meet its enrollment target this fall, it is currently ahead of its enrollment and admissions numbers it had this time last year. To reach the enrollment goal of 350 freshmen, the College plans to admit 700 students.
Henry also mentioned that she is working on getting the College at Wise on the Common Application — which the University uses in its admissions process — and the Board quickly entertained the idea of allowing Wise students to spend a year on Grounds in Charlottesville as a recruitment strategy.
The admissions discussion led into talks on joint branding efforts between the University in Charlottesville and the College at Wise. Macfarlane suggested creating a task force between the Provost’s Office, University Communications, the Office of Admissions and the College at Wise to create strategic co-branding.
“We co-brand and we can say that if you come to Wise, you’re going to have access to Charlottesville content as well as Wise content,” he said.
The committee members also mentioned the different colors between the University and the College at Wise. The College at Wise currently has its colors as red and gray, while the University’s are orange and blue. Henry said this may be due to the desire in the past to differentiate the identities of the University and the College at Wise.
“Now there seems to be a desire for us to be more alike and be more branded which goes along with my goal that making sure, you know, everyone says we’re the best kept secret in the Commonwealth, well I don’t think that’s a good thing,” Henry said.
As far as I’m concerned the University has something for everyone, and this idea extends to the library facilities it offers. However, it seems that there is always that one person in the McGregor Room with a cough, a tendency to chew rather loudly or a blissful ignorance to the fact that music really can travel beyond your own headphones.
The library really does bring out the worst in all of us. Never have so many raised eyebrows and rolled eyes and knowing looks of annoyance been flashed in one room without a fully-fledged fight breaking out. December is when all of this comes to a head. For those of us who tend to avoid the library like the plague until we really can resist no longer, I have compiled a guide explaining every person that you will find in the library, and how to make sure that this person is not you.
The one with the cough
This is perhaps the most common of library offenders. We all feel sorry for you, we really do. In fact, we have all been there. The feeling as the cough slowly moves up your throat and you feel yourself getting redder and redder, trying to stop yourself from exploding into a fit of unstoppable coughing. I get it. However, if you are unfortunate enough to have developed a cough during finals season, please stay away from the concentrated peace of the library. Not only is this for the sake of those around you, but also helps you avoid being the object of pure and unadulterated loathing. The library turns people into their worst selves, and when you add a cougher into the mix, this is not a place where you want to be. Stay at home, buy some cough syrup and treat yourself to a day of working at home.
The noisy eater
You can hear it from a mile off, and you know what it means. The loud rustle of the white Bodo’s bag is as recognisable to all University students as the distinctive sound of opening a packet of chips. What comes next is worse — the chewing. You feel every crunch. You turn up the volume of your headphones in a desperate attempt to drown it out, but somehow, it still manages to reach you. Perhaps, if you have a real compulsion to eat a packet of chips, do everyone around you a favour and take a break from the studying.
First, congratulations. Not only have you managed to find a boyfriend or girlfriend, but you also like them enough to want to study next to them. Or on their lap. Or while you hold hands. As weird as it may be to consider, not everyone wants to see this. If you simply are glued together, then you may want to consider your placement. After all, if love is blind, Sheetz will do just as well as Alderman.
The one whose music is far too loud
Newsflash — music travels beyond your headphones. I know, mind blowing! In fact, the music that seems to travel most successfully beyond your own headphones and into the ears of everybody else on your table is, in my experience, the most intolerable music you can think of. If you want to listen to heavy drum and bass while you work, no one will judge you. But when your music taste starts to interfere with the Ed Sheeran in your neighbor’s ears, there’s a problem.
We all know one. “I’ve had THE longest day at the library,” they say, and you nod sympathetically, wondering how they have possibly managed to make it through a whole day of scrolling through their Facebook News Feed and doing their Christmas shopping. You can see them across the room watching their film, messaging their friends and checking their Instagram for what must be the millionth time that day. All I can wonder, though, is why? Why are you here?
Whether the large number of these people at the University is a testament to the insatiable work ethic of students or a reflection on student housing, I am not sure. What I do know is that if you are asleep, you should not, under any circumstance, be sitting upright at your desk. You should be horizontal, under a comforter, under your own roof. It is perhaps the most irksome thing of all when looking for the highly-contested library seats, to learn that you are literally in a room full of the walking dead. Granted, sometimes it is unavoidable and sleep simply overtakes you. However, if you just happen to find yourself spread out on one of the McGregor Room couches with a blanket carefully placed over you, I certainly do not believe this is a coincidence.
Usually the sound of a message pinging through is a positive thing, right? It could be “him,” or “her” or probably your mum. Either way, it means someone is thinking about you. In the library, however, this changes. As a heads up — if you leave your phone on “loud” in the library, everyone in the room is looking at you. As you look down to the screen to check your message, every set of eyes in the room suddenly turns to glare at you, and then probably look at each other and shake their heads in mutual disapproval. It really is as easy as the click of a button, and if you truly are struggling with how to switch off the sound, I’ll be the first to say it — best of luck with those finals.
This last one is perhaps too niche for its own section, but please take note. If you’re the one using the virtual reality centre in the media room at 3 a.m. on Monday mornings, you might consider walking home, for your own and everybody else’s sake.
For all of the above, there is one solution — Starbucks, Starbucks, Starbucks. Cough when you want, chew as loudly as you like, play your music loud enough to rival the music they play on the speakers and fall asleep next to the fire to the dulcet tones of iPhones going off around the room.
Virginia women’s basketball came so close to ending a drought last season. Failing to reach the NCAA Tournament for the prior six seasons, the Cavaliers racked up several momentous victories — including an upset over then-No. 4 Florida State — en route to a 20-win season. For the first time in years, the team gave fans reason to be excited.
However, when Selection Sunday rolled around, the Hoos came up empty handed. A couple of costly late-season losses and an early ACC Tournament exit spelled doom, as the team barely failed to make it to the Big Dance.
This shortcoming inspired Virginia Coach Joanne Boyle to craft a simple message for her team coming into this season.
“It’s time for us to get off the bubble,” Boyle said.
The Hoos have certainly gotten off the bubble this season — but not in the way Boyle had hoped. Heading into a break for student-athletes to take their final exams, Virginia women’s basketball stands at 4-6 — its worst start in four seasons. And with myriad challenging ACC matches ahead, the Cavaliers are in real danger of missing March Madness for the eighth season in a row.
Boyle had good reason to believe in her team’s prospects at the beginning of the season. Sure, the Cavaliers had to replace leading scorer Breyana Mason, who graduated last spring. But that was the only player Virginia lost. Returning several veterans, such as senior forward Lauren Moses and senior guard Aliyah Huland El, the Cavaliers had experience — something the team sorely lacked last season.
Additionally, with a pair of up-and-coming stars in sophomore guards Dominique Toussaint and Jocelyn Willoughby — who were the 2016 Gatorade Girls’ Basketball Players of the Year in New York and New Jersey, respectively — the Cavaliers seemed poised to make a run, as they were projected to finish sixth in the ACC.
Yet, Virginia has woefully underperformed — it currently owns the worst record in its conference. Part of this is due to sloppy play. Turning the ball over 23 times in its season-opener against then-No. 7 Mississippi State, the Cavaliers set the tone for the rest of their season, as they average 16 turnovers per game, which is tied for 156th in the nation. These turnovers are costly, as they halt Virginia’s momentum and transfer it to the opposition — making it difficult for the team to stay in games.
Also lackadaisical has been Virginia’s defense. At first glance, it may seem like the Cavalier defense is impressive, as it is only allows a relatively low average of 59.8 points per game. However, upon delving deeper, Virginia’s defense has one glaring hole — fouls. Fouling opposing players a whopping 179 times this season — which puts Virginia tied for 323rd out of 345 teams for fewest fouls — the Cavaliers have given opponents’ 156 free throw attempts. Virginia’s number of fouls has proven to be detrimental this season. For example, in the team’s most recent setback — a 52-43 loss to Rutgers — a fourth of the Scarlet Knights’ points came from free throws, as they went 13 for 21 from the charity stripe.
The Cavaliers haven’t given fans much reason to be hopeful in their scoring, either. Averaging 61.2 points per game, Virginia’s scoring offense is the second-worst in the ACC. Part of this scoring struggle is rooted in the fact that Virginia doesn’t have a true scorer.
At 12.0 points per game, Toussaint leads all Cavalier scorers. However, the fact that she only places 26th in the ACC is indicative of just how poor Virginia’s offense is. With the exception of Toussaint and Willoughby, no other Cavalier averages double-digit scoring figures. Thus, when the team’s defense gets busted open and Virginia falls behind, Boyle doesn’t have many options she can use to get her squad back into the game.
Despite the poor record, Virginia women’s basketball has had some bright spots thus far. For example, with 30 blocked shots, sophomore forward Felicia Aiyeotan leads the ACC in blocks and is third in the nation. Additionally, the Hoos almost knocked off then-No. 15 Maryland, putting up quite the fight in a 60-59 losing effort.
However, Virginia’s shortcomings will only become more ruinous as the Cavaliers take on tougher opponents. With four ACC teams currently ranked in the AP Top 25 poll and several more receiving votes, Virginia will not be able to keep up with its more-talented opposition and will continue to accumulate losses.
Boyle had every right to believe that her team could get off the bubble. Yet, due to poor play, Virginia won’t even be in the conversation to make the NCAA Tournament come Selection Sunday in March.
Ben Tobin is an Assistant Managing Editor for The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at email@example.com or on Twitter at @TobinBen.
The Villa Diner, which operates on land owned by the University, is slated to close in May 2018 after Finals Weekend to allow for future redevelopment along the Emmet Street / Ivy Road Corridor.
The Villa Diner, which opened in the 1970s as a casual family-oriented restaurant, has been owned and operated by Ken Beachley and his wife for the last 12 years through a lease with the U.Va. Foundation, which provides real estate services for the University.
“We love U.Va. students and faculty,” Beachley said. “I think we’ve developed a great relationship with the University over the years. We host the U.Va. Guides group twice a year, they come in and do their initiations for their new people and that’s always a big treat. We host lots of the sports teams and we’ve just enjoyed being apart of the community here.”
Beachley has been aware of the University’s plans to redevelop the land for several years, but was surprised to learn that the University will not renew his lease and are demolishing the property in a few months.
“It’s upsetting and a little bit shocking,” he said. “I mean, I’ve certainly had enough warning and we’ve been planning for this for several years. You know, it’s unfortunate and we’re sad to leave but we are looking forward to doing it again down the road.”
Beachley said the Villa Diner is expected to reopen by July 2018 in a different location in the Charlottesville area. He will make a formal announcement when a new location is found.
“Hopefully [my employees] trust in me in this that we’re going to successfully relocate our business and hope to keep everyone employed and hopefully be bigger and better than ever,” Beachley said. “Obviously there’s some stress on terms for everybody in a situation like this, but I think we’re all hoping for the best.”
Colette Sheehy, senior vice president of operations at the University, said the outlined improvements to the north side of Ivy Road are designed to make the area more pedestrian friendly, with an open green space for stormwater management in the middle to create a more welcoming environment.
“We will have to take down The Cavalier Inn first,” Sheehy said. “We can’t really work too much until we get that demolished. So that will happen over the course of this summer and then we’ll start all the other construction.”
The renovations, which will begin after The Villa Diner and The Cavalier Inn are demolished, will be a collaborative process with the city of Charlottesville, which has received $12.1 million in state funding for streetscape improvements on Emmet Street.
In addition to improving pedestrian connectivity and adding green space, the University eventually wants to add new buildings as it redevelops the 14.5-acre property.
Correction: This article previously misspelled Ken Beachley's name in one place as Beachey. The spelling has been corrected.
Detectives with the Charlottesville Police Department arrested a Charlottesville man Thursday in connection to the Oct. 27 Wertland Street attempted abduction.
Matthew Kyle Logarides, 29, was charged with misdemeanor sexual battery and felony abduction by force, according to records from the Charlottesville General District Court.
The reported incident involved a female victim who was walking on the 1100 block of Wertland Street when a stranger approached her from behind, covered her mouth and forced her to the ground.
The suspect then threatened the victim, but fled when a passerby heard her scream.
Police had previously circulated images of a person of interest who was described as a “white male who was seen wearing a dark two-toned hooded jacket, dark pants and a green camouflage style baseball hat.”
Logarides is scheduled for a hearing in Charlottesville General District Court Jan. 25, and in the meantime is being held in Albemarle Charlottesville Regional Jail.
The Charlottesville Police Department said in a release that anyone with information should contact Detective Wright-Settle at (434) 970-3274 or Crime Stoppers at (434) 977-4000.
At its last meeting of the fall semester Tuesday night, Student Council passed a resolution in support of preserving Lambeth Field, which could become the site of a new softball stadium under a controversial proposal the University’s Board of Visitors is slated to hear details about on Thursday. Student Council’s resolution was unanimously approved.
If approved, the stadium seating and dugouts would would be located southeast of the Lambeth Field apartments, and the historic colonnades at Lambeth Field would surround the outfield. Plans for a facility outlined in Board documents include a home locker room, team meeting rooms and coaching and staff offices.
Some students and local residents, however, have criticized the planning process for the stadium and are concerned about the potential impacts of light and noise, as well as the impacts on parking. The Board’s Buildings and Grounds Committee is expected to vote on an architect for the project Thursday, although a vote on the site of the project has been deferred.
The resolution supporting Lambeth Field’s preservation said the more than 818 residents of Lambeth Apartments would suffer inconveniences due to noise and traffic, as well as the removal of the apartment complex’s parking lot, if the proposal were put into effect. It also defended the area’s historical value.
“Lambeth Field is a historic and important space,” the resolution reads. “Student Council affirms the importance of green and historical spaces like Lambeth Field, and upholds the value of student and community input in decisions regarding the proposed softball stadium.”
Student Council Representatives also unanimously passed a bill creating eight new CIOs — CHN Yearbook Committee, Chronically Ill and Disabled Cavaliers, DOTA 2, Food Law at Virginia Organization, Lion’s Club, Machine Learning Club, Men Advancing Nursing Club and Paradanse Dance Crew.
Ty Zirkle, a third-year College student and Student Council Vice President for Organizations, sponsored the bill and recommended that all eight should be approved as CIOs, and representatives voted unanimously in favor of their approval.
Finally, the legislative body passed two resolutions thanking CAR2Vote and the Center for Politics for their roles in the voter shuttle program.
The first resolution thanked the University’s Center for Politics for a $477.50 donation — half the money required to finance the program, which repurposed SafeRide vans as shuttles between polling places and stops on Grounds and in Charlottesville. According to the resolution, 522 first-year students used the shuttle service to get to the polls on Election Day.
The second of the resolutions recognized CAR2Vote, a local organization run by volunteers who drove students and Charlottesville residents to and from polling locations at Johnson Elementary School and Buford Middle School.
The document stated Student Council’s deep gratitude for the organization’s contribution, calling it an invaluable service.
An independent review released last Friday strongly criticized the University Police Department for failing to collaborate with other law enforcement agencies and adequately respond to the white nationalist torchlit march through Grounds Aug. 11, describing the response as “woefully inadequate.”
“University officials were aware of this event for hours before it began but took no action to enforce separation between groups or otherwise prevent violence,” reads the the independent review of white nationalist protests that took place in the city this past summer. “They were unprepared when hundreds of white nationalists walked through the University grounds and surrounded a small group of counter-protesters at the base of a statue of Thomas Jefferson next to the Rotunda.”
The city government commissioned the 220-page report from former U.S. Attorney Tim Heaphy and a team of lawyers at the firm Hunton & Williams. The review looks at how local and state officials responded to white nationalist events in Charlottesville this past summer.
In the section of the report dealing with the Aug. 11 white nationalist torchlit march at the University, it criticizes University Police Chief Michael Gibson for failing to create a “comprehensive plan” to keep white nationalists and counter-protesters separate that evening.
The march turned violent when groups clashed near the statue of Thomas Jefferson north of the Rotunda, leading to physical altercations and the use of pepper spray.
The report takes note of the “Mutual Aid Agreement between the City of Charlottesville, Albemarle County and the University,” which states University police must formally ask for support from CPD.
“Unfortunately, by the time UPD requested assistance, many of the disorders around the Jefferson statue were over and the participants were either dazed or fleeing,” the report states.
The team that wrote the report also criticized what it believed to be Gibson’s failure to coordinate with Charlottesville or Virginia State Police or Emergency Services in the hours leading up to the event led to a “fragmented and disorganized response” that night.
“Despite ample warning that a large group would march on Grounds with torches and confront counter-protesters, UPD failed to take proactive steps to prevent violence. They did not attempt to separate the marchers from those that came to confront them. They did not station any uniformed officers near the statue, even after a confrontation was obvious. Most importantly, they failed to accept multiple offers of assistance from CPD officers who were staged immediately across the street,” the report reads.
While the report notes Gibson “doubled the number of [University Police] officers on duty” and placed some officers at the Rotunda, it says he failed “to coordinate a unified response” with Charlottesville and Virginia State Police and Emergency Services.
“UPD waited for violence to occur before requesting such assistance. Even then, they were disorganized and unfamiliar with the process of declaring an unlawful assembly. Their response to the Friday night torchlight event was woefully inadequate, even for a small campus police department,” the report stated.
The report also criticized the lack of a notification from the University to the community on the evening of Aug. 11.
“Neither Chief Gibson nor anyone else sent any notification about the pending event to the University community,” the report said. “Body camera footage from later that evening shows pedestrians, including one female in an evening gown, walking across the Lawn shortly after the march. The failure to distribute timely information to the University community exposed bystanders and raised the prospect of their unforeseen exposure to a contentious demonstration.”
The University’s alert system has since become a topic of debate among the student body, with some saying that the community should be notified when white nationalist groups stage rallies, which also happened again in October.
Dubbing the University Police’s response on Aug. 11 “police passivity,” the report states, that “it also seems likely that the insufficient police response on Friday night emboldened people
who intended to engage in similar acts of violence on Saturday.”
After the release of the report, the University issued a statement, saying it “has acknowledged that its response to the horrific and unprecedented events in August should have been better” and it has “taken immediate steps to make UVA and the surrounding areas safer.”
These steps include the formation of the Deans Working Group, expanding the Ambassador program and implementing new security measures for major events.
Gibson did not return an email request for comment on the report.
In an interview with The Cavalier Daily last Friday, University President Teresa Sullivan responded to critiques of the University’s response in August, while acknowledging that she had not yet read the full city report at the time of the interview — which took place just a few hours after the report was released.
“I think all of us could have done better, if we had known what was going to happen,” Sullivan said. “Obviously, if we had had perfect knowledge of this, we would have designed things differently. And I do think that if there is a next time — and I hope there won’t be — but if there is a next time, I think you’ll see a rather different response from us.”
Emails recently publicized by the Chronicle of Higher Education have shown that University Police received word about the possibility of a torchlit march as early as Aug. 8.
Sullivan has previously said she found out about the march on the evening of Aug. 11, but records have shown she sent an email to members of the Board of Visitors on Aug. 9 noting the possibility of white nationalists coming to the University in conjunction with the Unite the Right rally planned for Aug. 12.
Sullivan told The Cavalier Daily the University’s response would be improved, should another rally take place. ‘Unite the Right’ organizer Jason Kessler has applied for a permit to hold another rally next August.
“We are discussing with members of our Law faculty who have expertise in this area, additional time, place, manner regulations for the University. Right now we’ve got very little in the way of time, place, manner regulations. But a number of those regulations have been upheld in this Fourth Circuit, where we’re located. So we’re reviewing that to see what would make sense for us to do,” Sullivan said.
Former U.S. Attorney Tim Heaphy presented a report to the Charlottesville City Council on Monday, detailing the findings of his team’s third-party review of the city’s response to and management of this year’s white supremacist events, including the deadly Aug. 12 ‘Unite the Right’ rally.
Heaphy’s presentation was followed by a public hearing and an action plan presented by City Manager Maurice Jones based on Heaphy’s findings.
Heaphy, a former U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Virginia, was tasked by the city with conducting the independent and external review.
The city launched the review Aug. 25 in response to citizen concerns expressed at an emotional City Council meeting, in which speakers demanded answers from Council concerning the management of the “Unite the Right” rally.
According to Heaphy, his team interviewed about 150 people, and reviewed half a million documents, over 300 hours of video footage and 2,000 still images during the process. Heaphy also said that his team incurred a fee of $1.5 million dollars in the process, but made an agreement in which the City of Charlottesville would only have to pay $350,000.
Much of Heaphy’s presentation emphasized what the report identified as flawed management and response measures conducted by the Charlottesville Police Department and Virginia State Police during the Aug. 12 ‘Unite the Right’ rally.
During the review, Heaphy claimed to uncover evidence that Police Chief Al Thomas intentionally allowed for conflict to occur between ‘Unite the Right’ demonstrators and counter-protesters in order to be able to declare an unlawful assembly. Thomas has since disputed the assertion.
Heaphy said that Charlottesville police officers were told to intervene between protesters only when life-threatening violence was possible while Virginia State Police personnel — stationed behind barricades in Emancipation Park — were specifically instructed to protect the park Aug. 12.
Heaphy also said the white nationalist torchlit march through University Grounds the evening of Aug. 11 was a major factor in the events of Aug. 12 due to the University’s insufficient and late response.
During the public hearing, a number of speakers expressed their frustrations toward the Council regarding the findings of the report, specifically with regards to the response of police personnel Aug. 12.
Dave Ghamandi, an Albemarle County resident, said that the report was not comprehensive enough and did not absolve the Council of any blame for the events of Aug. 12.
“So this is what a world class city looks like?” Ghamandi said. “Right now you couldn't run a PTA. This so-called independent review is not going to wash the blood off your hands. The review is full of errors and omissions and is an insult to the dead and wounded and the community.”
Ghamandi also said that local police departments should be held accountable for the events of Aug. 12 amidst cheers and applause from the audience.
“You need to defund the police department,” Ghamandi said. “You need to unarm the police department. That’s C’ville Police, U.Va/ Police, Albemarle and State Police. Racism is in their DNA … No one in their right mind can argue that police deserve more money; slash their budget and let’s work toward a police-free society.“
Star Peterson, a Charlottesville resident, said she witnessed police laugh as counter-protesters were assaulted Aug. 12., and she said she believes that police personnel were the root of the problem.
“This past summer was a prime example of the police force’s decision not to protect or serve the most marginalized members of our community,” Peterson said. “On Aug. 12 I watched an officer smirk and laugh as anti-racist activists were hurt defending our city.
“The police performed their designated role on Aug. 12 — to protect and serve themselves and the people already in power,” Peterson said. “The police are not the answer, the police are an integral part of the problem.
Don Gathers, former chair of the Blue Ribbon Commission on Race, Memorials and Public Spaces, echoed the complaints of other speakers in asking why race wasn't included as a factor of analysis in Heaphy’s report.
“[The report] does not address the specific issue that brought the Nazis here in the first place, and that’s racism,” Gather said. “You cannot direct or issue a report that deals specifically with racism when you don't address race in the people who did [the report].”
After the hearing, Vice Mayor Wes Bellamy asked Heaphy why race wasn’t included as a factor during his team’s review.
“There’s no way you can talk about these events without the context of race, it's crucial and informed so much of what occurred,” Heaphy said. “It did not, however, in our view, in our findings influence directly how the city prepared for those events. I don't believe our task was to identify the roots of white supremacy or to talk more broadly about the corrosive effect about that among communities in Charlottesville, but those are real issues.”
Nancy Carpenter, a Charlottesville resident, said that the University and President Teresa Sullivan in particular need to be held accountable for the events of Aug. 11 at the University.
“U.Va., Terry Sullivan, needs to be held accountable,” Carpenter said. “She’s leaving Charlottesville with a bad taste in our mouth … I'm ashamed that I stood up for her several years ago when the Board of Visitors wanted to get rid of her. They should have.”
Ben Doherty, a Charlottesville resident, also said that the University needed to be held accountable for the events of Aug. 11 and should be more involved in combating white supremacy in Charlottesville.
“It was the University's failure to protect its own community from white supremacists on Aug. 11 that started this whole thing, that started the whole cycle of violence,” Doherty said. “To this date they refuse to be held accountable for that failure … you really can't move forward with combating white supremacy in this community until you require President Sullivan to put one of her employees at the table with you [Council] and talk about combating white supremacy in the community.”
In their report, Heaphy’s team criticized the University Police Department’s preparation and response to the events of Aug. 11, writing that UPD failed to collaborate with law enforcement partners, which contributed to a “woefully inadequate” response.
In an interview with The Cavalier Daily last Friday — the same day Heaphy’s report was issued — Sullivan said she had not read the report at the time of the interview, but said, “I think all of us could have done better, if we had known what was going to happen.”
“Obviously, if we had had perfect knowledge of this, we would have designed things differently,” Sullivan added. “And I do think that if there is a next time — and I hope there won’t be — but if there is a next time, I think you’ll see a rather different response from us.”
The University also issued a statement in response to the report Friday, highlighting efforts of the Deans Working Group that was formed after the events of Aug. 11 and 12 to review the University’s response to the torchlit march on Grounds. The report also noted the University’s passage of new open flame regulations and the hiring of a firm to evaluate the University's security and safety policies.
City Councilor-elect Nikuyah Walker also spoke during a public comment period at Monday night’s meeting and said it was problematic for all of the blame for the events of Aug. 12 to fall upon City Manager Jones and Chief Thomas as African-American men when there is evidence that the state response was also flawed.
“I just think that we're still missing a lot of the root causes of a lot of this,” Walker said. “Until you talk about white supremacy, white dominance, you cannot start having conversations, there cannot be rumors that the two people that are going to be asked to leave potentially are two black men … We’re supposed to be okay with the decisions being made about two black men being the face of who is accountable for centuries of oppression in this community? That is absolutely unacceptable.”
After the public hearing, at which a total of 27 local residents spoke, Jones presented an action plan detailing steps the city is taking or will take to move forward and improve after Aug. 12.
In particular, Jones cited better training of police personnel in de-escalation tactics, the development of a city emergency management team and increased cooperation and training with the Virginia State Police for large events in which there may be violence.
Jones cited the Council’s decision earlier in the meeting to create a police civilian review board in order to increase accountability and transparency of the Charlottesville Police Department as a step forward in addressing the flawed response to Aug. 12.
Jones said that the mistrust in local government in the Charlottesville community needs to be addressed.
“There is a lot of mistrust in our community right now,” Jones said. “There’s a lot of folks who are really concerned about the future of our city. We do need to have conversations about it, we do need to have solutions about it.”
Jones also stated that racial disparity is an ongoing issue in the city which needs to be addressed and hoped it would be in some capacity during the next few months.
“We know that race is an issue in Charlottesville. It has been for a long time, and we’re trying to do something about it and we're going to continue to do something about it,” Jones said. “Hopefully we'll be able to address a lot of the concerns people have had over the course of the last few months of how things went this past summer.”
Playing its second true road game of the year, the Virginia basketball team looked to continue its unbeaten start to the season against West Virginia. The Cavaliers were unable to overcome their own turnovers and West Virginia’s hot shooting, as the Mountaineers handed them a 68-61 loss.
Virginia (8-1) struggled with the Mountaineers’ (8-1) trademark “Press Virginia” defense early, leading to an early 0-7 deficit. The Cavaliers rallied back on big shots from sophomore forward Mamadi Diakite and senior guard Devon Hall, and most of the first half was a back-and-forth defensive struggle. The Cavaliers fell down by eight in the closing minutes of the half, but a big three by Hall and a last-second foul on redshirt freshman guard De’Andre Hunter allowed Virginia to climb back and end the half down 26-29.
The absence of Virginia’s leading scorer, sophomore guard Kyle Guy, was noticeable in the first half. Guy was held scoreless, missing all six of his field goals and turning the ball over twice. The thunderous crowd at the WVU Coliseum booed him heavily each time he touched the ball.
The second half turned into a shootout between the teams as each offense heated up. The Cavaliers went down 32-39 early, but Guy caught fire soon after, firing three straight buckets from beyond the arc to put Virginia up. However, West Virginia senior guard Jevon Carter answered right back with a three of his own.
Guy would make three more triples to keep the game tight, but the Cavalier defense could not slow down the Mountaineers on offense, where they made countless tough buckets to stay ahead. A three from Virginia sophomore guard Ty Jerome cut the Mountaineers’ lead to two with less than three minutes, but his costly turnover and foul on Carter on successive drives spelled doom for the Cavaliers. Carter made key free throws down the stretch as the Mountaineers cemented the win.
Hall lead Virginia with 19 points and six assists, while Guy added 18 points, all on three-pointers. Carter led West Virginia with 23 points and sophomore forward Lamont West chipped in 22.
Virginia will look to rebound from its tough road loss against the Mountaineers when the team takes on Davidson Dec. 16, after a break for final exams. The Cavaliers have three non-conference clashes remaining before ACC play begins Dec. 30.
“Heard Val d’Orcia is beautiful in the fall. Any recommendations for a day trip from Florence?” posted Susan from Grand Rapids, Mich.
“Just hop on the 42 at Buonconvento. It really is easy,” responded Kevin from Madison, Wis. without ever specifying whether the 42 was a train, bus, dirigible or small, personally-operated biplane.
“My son Tim and I went to Val d’Orcia in September, just after Tim finished his first semester of college. He wanted to get out of the country because he had a tough semester,” chimed in Beth from Tuscaloosa, Ala. without offering any tangible advice about Val d’Orcia or even any actually juicy gossip about poor Tim.
“Make sure you bring walking shoes,” Sally from Fort Worth, Texas said.
“Val d’Orcia is terrible. You should go to Thailand instead,” opined Lou from Sacramento, Calif.
“husBnd an i hd great tm ther,” piped in Rebecca from Dallas, Texas.
“Make sure you meet Manuel,” added Phyllis from Annapolis, Md. “He worked at a pizza place. Or maybe it was a gelateria. But he had such a great singing voice!”
The advice offered by TripAdvisor, Lonely Planet and other online travel forums always sounds a little bit like it came from Grandma’s Facebook feed. One comment is overly specific, the next is devoid of substance entirely. Comments that seem useful are inevitably at least seven years old and reference bus routes that the Italian government has long since abandoned. Emojis are never, ever used correctly.
TripAdvisor is the world’s largest travel website. Google “things to do in” any city and TripAdvisor will be the first result. As of 2015, the site was home to a quarter of a billion comments on over five million different restaurants, hotels and activities. TripAdvisor connects travelers with millions of new potential advisors through a vast network of online reviews and forums.
The website’s rise has been divisive. Proponents say it’s raised the standards for the hospitality industry all over the world by giving a voice to hordes of average travelers, not just a select few professional critics.
“Our community’s voice has done more to improve service standards than professional reviews ever could,” writes TripAdvisor CEO Steve Kaufer.
There’s some empirical evidence to support his claim. Ireland’s University College of Dublin conducted a survey and found that as Irish hoteliers tried to earn positive TripAdvisor reviews, their hotels improved and more patrons visited.
On the other hand, it’s easy to look at TripAdvisor and say that the sheer amount of information it provides has taken the fun out of travel. In the 21st century — so the story goes — there is no such thing as an unturned stone. Allison from Williamsburg and 351 other anonymous reviewers have established that the service at Caffe Traversi is slow, so there’s no reason to ever take any risks or try anything untested. According to its critics, TripAdvisor has sanitized travel, removing all the excitement that comes with experiencing the unknown.
My experience this semester suggests that TripAdvisor isn’t destroying travel, simply because it isn’t actually very good at what it purports to do. The site makes recommendations based on an aggregate of user reviews, so the attractions it praises most effusively are always the most popular and touristy.
For example, at the time of writing, Rome’s Colosseum had been reviewed 111,048 times on TripAdvisor. As one of the world’s greatest architectural marvels, it boasts a healthy 4.5 out of 5 star rating. The Trevi Fountain has been reviewed 72,644 times and also has 4.5 stars, seeing as it is one of the most impressive pieces of art ever created. The Pantheon has just a piddly 59,452 reviews and also boasts a 4.5 rating.
If a 4.5 star rating seems like a risky proposition, TripAdvisor can also point users towards more exciting, unique, culturally invigorating 5-star-rated attractions such as Game Over Escape Rooms in the Trastevere neighborhood — or Escape Room Roma, or Escape Room Campo dei Fiori or the Escape Room Exitus Roma, all rated 5 stars. Maybe the Pantheon should rebrand as a big, circular, oddly decorated escape room.
It would be one thing if TripAdvisor plastered all the local secrets all over its front page, but that almost never happens, because the people making recommendations on TripAdvisor generally don’t know all that much about the places they are reviewing. So many millions of experts paradoxically results in a paucity of expertise. Everyone flocks to put in their two cents on the largest and most obvious attractions, and when they veer off the beaten path they reveal that they aren’t experts at all.
More than once this semester, I’ve found myself standing outside of a rough and tumble eatery in some foreign city, wondering if I’ve stumbled upon a local diamond in the rough or, rather, the type of hole in the wall joint that will leave a hole in the wall of my stomach lining. The urge to look the place up online is strong, but the experts on Yelp and TripAdvisor and the like are often dramatically off the mark, if they’re even aware of the place at all.
In Prague, for example, my friend and I followed a recommendation from our hostel and ate some absolutely fantastic sausages from a cart in Wenceslas Square. Look up Wenceslas Square on TripAdvisor and you’ll find Seth from Palmetto saying “beware the sausage stands!” Sorry Seth, but something tells me I should trust Vaclav from Prague on this one.
TripAdvisor has so many reviews that sometimes places get swept up into an unusable tornado of information. I tried looking up the kebab truck we stopped at in Berlin’s bi-weekly Turkish market, but searching “kebab in Berlin” yields 462 results. I even tried getting specific, but “rusty white kebab truck run by Turkish guys who serve absolutely phenomenal falafel in Berlin” somehow yields even more results.
The opposite happens, too — unglamorous local places fall through the cracks. Maybe I was trying to use the wrong one of the Hungarian language’s four different ‘u’s, but the delectable butcher stand we stumbled across in Budapest was nowhere to be found online. I’ve found some amazing food this semester without the web’s help. Despite traveling through unknown territory for the last four months, my stomach lining remains intact.
Some people believe the internet, in its infinite wisdom and connectedness, makes traveling better. Some believe that traveling should be all about not having any wisdom at all, and that the internet has taken the thrill out of discovering something new. They’re both wrong, for the simple fact that the internet, in all its writhing anonymity, doesn’t have nearly as much expertise as it seems. The locals still know best. Some hidden gems are still delightfully hidden. The world is shrinking, and it’s impossible to know what the future will hold. But TripAdvisor hasn’t destroyed traveling just yet — no matter what Denny from Topeka, Kan. thinks.
The University Board of Visitors Finance Committee will be asked to approve tuition increases for the 2018-19 academic year at its meeting this Thursday. According to agenda materials outlining proposed increases in undergraduate tuition rates, the Board will consider an average increase of of 3.3 percent for in-state students and 3.9 percent for out-of-state students.
All returning undergraduates in all schools will see their annual tuition rates rise by 2.5 percent — $308 to $436 — dependent on the school, while tuition for returning out-of-state undergraduates in all schools will increase by 3.5 percent — $1,530 to $1,712 — again dependent on the school. Entering undergraduates in the College and Curry School will see their rates rise by the same amount.
Unlike tuition rates for the College and Curry School, incoming in-state students studying in the Architecture, Nursing, Commerce, Engineering and Batten Schools will see a higher percentage increase in their tuition than incoming out-of-state students.
Annual tuition rates for entering undergraduates in the School of Architecture are proposed to increase by $1,334, or 10 percent, while the rate for out-of-state will increase by $2,530, or 5.9 percent. However, a $500 fee will be eliminated for these students, which will result in a net increase of 6.2 percent and 4.7 percent for in-state and out-of-state entering students respectively.
Annual tuition rates for entering in-state students in the School of Nursing are proposed to increase by $2,334, or 17.5 percent. Tuition for incoming out-of-state students will increase by $3,530, or 8.2 percent.
Tuition for incoming Engineering undergraduates is proposed to increase by $1,436, or 8.2 percent, while the rate for out-of-state will increase by $2,674, or 5.7 percent.
Annual tuition rates for entering third-year in-state undergraduates in the Batten School are proposed to increase by $2,128 or 11.5 percent. The out-of-state rate students will increase by $3,378 or 7 percent.
Annual tuition rates for entering third-year in-state students in the McIntire School are proposed to increase by $2,962 or 16 percent. The rate for out-of-state students will increase by $4,212 or 8.7 percent.
Most of the University’s graduate and professional schools are proposing a tuition and fee increase ranging from 3 percent to 6 percent for in-state students and 2 percent to 6 percent for out-of-state.
The Board will also vote on a $110 increase in the mandatory comprehensive fee, which is paid by all regular session students.
The majority of the fee will address increased needs in student health such as general medicine, counseling and psychological services and accessibility needs. A small amount — $5 — will be used for planned compensation increases for employees and operational needs in the University Transit Service, Newcomb Hall and Student Health, and $4 will go towards providing more arts offerings for students.
At the last Student Senate meeting of the year on Nov. 29, several students spoke out against the tuition increases and questioned Melody Bianchetto, the University’s vice president for finance, about the tuition hikes.
During the meeting, Wes Gobar, a fourth-year College student and Black Student Alliance president, asked how the University would incentivize students of color to apply in light of the events of Aug. 11 and 12 and the added tuition hikes.
“I just really wanted to speak for a little bit on the urgency of this,” Gobar said. “I know the University is currently seeing a decline in applications from African-Americans.”
He said he felt the long-term effects, too, could be damaging to the University’s prestige and academic excellence.
“I’m most worried the profile of our school will change, our school will be less socioeconomically diverse,” Gobar said. “It weakens our standing as a public university.”
In an interview with The Cavalier Daily last Friday, University President Teresa Sullivan addressed the tuition hikes and said the proposed rates fall in line with the University’s goals of low tuition.
“For the overall tuition increase, it falls in line with our intention to try and hold us to be as low as possible,” Sullivan said. “We’ve had some of the lowest in the Commonwealth for the last couple of years.”
Sullivan also said that some of the schools getting differential tuition increases, such as the Commerce School, are running an operating deficit and need the increase to get out of their deficit position. She noted the increase is justifiable because of how much money their students make as starting salaries.
“There’s a bigger objective though, and that is to try and ween as many undergraduate schools as possible off the state appropriation, which declines every year,” Sullivan said. “It’s foreseeable that one year there won’t be one and so what we’d like to do is to get more of that appropriation aimed at the College, which doesn’t really have the ability to raise the additional funds the same way as so far Engineering and McIntire and so on.”
The Virginia women’s basketball team took on Rutgers in Piscataway, N.J. for the last game before a short break for final exams.
The Cavaliers (4-6) picked up the 900th win in the program’s history, defeating UNC-Greensboro 68-50 Saturday night. The Cavaliers shot 60 percent from the three-point line in the contest, a welcome sight after struggling offensively in recent contests.
Looking to capture a victory on the road against Rutgers (8-2) Monday, Virginia did not open with the intensity they needed, falling into a quick 9-3 hole. A 7-0 run helped the Cavaliers get back into the contest, enabling them to take a 12-11 first quarter lead.
The second quarter was not so kind to the Cavaliers, who scored only five points and found themselves trailing 26-17 at half.
Sophomore guard Jocelyn Willoughby tried to keep Virginia within reach in the fourth quarter, going on a solo seven-point run to start the quarter. Rutgers had other plans — going on a 7-2 run to lead 45-37.
Virginia was forced to play the fouling game in the final minutes, trying to squeeze out a few missed Scarlet Knight free throws and turn them into useful possessions on the other end.
Unable to take advantage of their opportunities, the Cavaliers fell 52-43 in their final contest.
After the short recess for final exams, Virginia travels to West Palm Beach, Fla. to take on Ohio Sunday, Dec. 17 and Indiana Monday Dec. 18.
The First Year Players offer first-year students a chance to shine onstage every year — and shine they did in this fall’s production of “Pippin.” While not always perfectly polished and professional, their production was carried by an infectious cast and ensemble energy that made it impossible not to laugh and cheer along with the enthusiastic performance.
The play tells the story of Charlemagne’s son, the titular Pippin (first-year College student Brandon Bolick), who feels like the black sheep of his family. The show follows him through a series of adventures, searching for meaning through epic battles, casual sex and finally settling down with a family. His life is acted out by circus players, headed by the Leading Player (first-year College student Hanna Kornell), who promises an exciting finale.
Kornell, as the Leading Player, set the example for the rest of the ensemble with an impressive, enthusiastic performance. She brought the exact type of over-the-top energy that makes a show like “Pippin” so enjoyable, and coupled it with an excellent vocal performance.
The highlight of the show, though, may have been the hilarious antics and clever little jokes added in by the truly committed ensemble. They represented the players of the circus troupe acting out Pippin’s life — creatively providing the background action for a wide variety of scenes. Even without speaking roles, these actors brought plenty of personality to their roles, and provided the backbone for what was a truly entertaining show.
In one scene in a farmyard, an ensemble member playing a pig developed a grudge against Pippin for stepping on him — deftly conveying his emotions to the audience from the background of the scene without speaking a word. At another moment, ensemble members protesting the king carried Trump and Clinton-themed signs. Even the orchestra got involved — on several occasions, members of the pit stepped up on stage for a quick joke with one of the actors. All of these efforts, and more, kept the audience cracking up throughout the show.
At some points in the Sunday night performance, it was almost hard to tell what was part of the show and what were light-hearted closing night pranks by the cast and crew. During a sex scene between Pippin and Catherine (first-year College student Julia Guarneri), one saxophonist stood up for a solo to the tune of the “Sexy Sax Man” song, to uproarious laughs from the audience.
As the two sat up in bed and threw the blankets off, Pippin pulled out a Juul and took a post-coital puff –– a true innovation in the theatre arts, and another gag that the audience loved. There’s no telling whether irreverent jokes like these were scripted as part of the show all along, but it hardly mattered –– the audience was eating it up.
The speaking cast brought much of the same energy and enthusiasm to their roles. Charles (first-year College student Doug Kulow) drew laughs with plenty of funny one-liners, and brought just the right confident charisma to the role, shining in high-tempo songs like “War is a Science.” His stepson, Lewis (first-year College student Chris Lang), demonstrated the same sense of masculine confidence, only heavily exaggerated –– a character choice the audience seemed to appreciate.
Fastrada (first-year College student Veronica Seguin), struck just the right balance as Charles’ clever, scheming wife and Lewis’ overprotective mother. Berthe (first-year College student Amelia Lindsey) — Pippin’s surprisingly crude mother — demonstrated both her comedic talent and her excellent voice in her scene. She had the audience laughing along with her, and, before long, singing along in her song “No Time At All.”
Topping off the strong performance by the cast was a well-executed set, costume and props design by the crew. The set was fairly elaborate but still surprisingly versatile, serving as a wide variety of locations throughout the play with only minor adjustments. The costumes and props fit nicely with the irreverent, enthusiastic tone of the show. For example, Lewis paraded proudly into battle wearing his armor and weapons — a foam sword and a catcher’s pads. The ensemble wore very simple gray and black costumes, which allowed the small ensemble — just 14 people — to stand in as a wide variety of characters.
It was simply impossible to watch FYP’s production and not have a good time –– the cast’s love for the show and for performing was too infectious. It wasn’t the most poised and polished –– much of the humor bordered on irreverence and breaking the fourth wall –– but was all the better for it. The unorthodox approach allowed the players’ sense of humor to come through and allowed the show to keep a sense of self-awareness. The budding actors truly seemed to love bringing the musical’s magic to the stage, and the audience couldn’t help but love watching them do it.
As a young person in the year 2017, this confession may sound bizarre — but I have never been good with technology. I still have yet to learn how to connect my phone to Cavalier wifi, downloading any form of software or computer program is a constant struggle, and — in all seriousness — I once saved a Word document to an unrecoverable, non-existent corner of my crowded desktop, never to be seen again. I have never understood the deep and confounding intricacies of technology, but it is certainly an untapped resource for students.
I say this mostly as a general disclaimer. So hopefully there will be little judgement when I soon admit, I just learned the purpose of that little crescent moon icon on all iPhones. For those of you like me — surviving, not thriving — that button essentially silences your device, functionally meaning “no more distractions.” This function prevents notifications from pinging and popping onto your screen, which admittedly is intuitive when coupled with the function’s name of “Do Not Disturb.”
In general, I would in no way consider myself to be a social media aficionado. I do have my days when Instagram and Snapchat consume what little free-time I have, but I try to hold onto some residual self-control throughout the week. What tends to nab me — quietly, furtively — is the automatic response my body has chosen for when my phone screen lights up or pings. As if Pavlov himself conditioned me for this, my hand unconsciously stretches towards the device. I pick it up, unlock it and proceed to play “Domino Drop” or scroll through my feed on Instagram — sometimes, without even checking the notification that originally caught my attention.
While I am not narcissistic enough to assume that I am the only person that experiences this kind of ghostly compulsion, I certainly feel as if I have discovered a new, efficient method of studying — something that has been hidden under our noses the whole time.
For the weeks that followed my discovery, I found myself forgetting about the very existence of my phone. While it was usually by my side — as another guilty pleasure of mine is listening to wordless, classical music when studying — it remained faraway, well-removed, distant from my mind. Nothing buzzed. Nothing beeped. Nothing lit up. I was left to quiet, and it was the most productive study environment I had ever been in — at least, during the duration of my college career.
Even outside of the confines of academia, I kept the function turned on. Instead of messaging friends via text and in a hyper-focused impulse, I offered my full attention to the friends I had around at the moment. I found that this made our time together more valuable.
As students during finals week, we have a great amount pushing against our success — crowded libraries, random wifi outages, peers that refuse to acknowledge the simple beauty of quiet hours — but we also have a great amount on our side. We have faculty that will fight, tooth and nail, to see us thrive. We have countless resources — such as “Do Not Disturb” — supplied to us from our university and from our enigmatic technology. Most of all, we have one another to offer support and affirmation. With all of these services at our fingertips, our achievement becomes an almost real, tangible thing. It becomes inevitable.
Last week, Cavalier Daily columnist Thomas Ferguson argued for the elimination of safe spaces at the University. Safe spaces, Ferguson argued, threaten our First Amendment right to free speech and hinder academic discourse at universities. One must hope that this appalling contortion of safe space theory comes from ignorance alone, rather than a willful decision to politicize students’ security. Whatever the intent, Ferguson earns partisan points with his article while threatening the safety of queer and minority students, as well as the survivors of trauma. Safe spaces have nothing to do with free speech and everything to do with protecting students from personal attacks and abuse.
Ferguson’s argument is far from unusual. In 2015, a similar Cavalier Daily article suggested that the expansion of college safe spaces comes with limitations on the freedom of speech. Judith Shulevitz has railed against the dangers of avoiding “discomfiting or distressing viewpoints” in safe spaces. Even The Washington Post’s Jeffrey Kidder, in criticizing Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ views on political correctness, uses “safe space” language to address issues of free speech. The problem is that safe spaces do not protect students from mere “discomfort” or “confrontation” — they protect students from attacks on their value as human beings: from personal assaults on a student’s right to be who they are, and from needless re-ignition of past traumatic pain.
Ferguson uses Merriam-Webster to define “safe space.” I suggest, however, that we look to the individuals who need the protection of these spaces to get a working definition. Campus Pride founder Shane Windmeyer said that safe spaces are where students “don’t have to worry about being harmed or discriminated against or have any type of violence in their community targeted to them.” At the University, queer students have used safe spaces to protect against “assault or oppression.” In reality, safe spaces prohibit far less than Ferguson or other commentators would suggest. The constructive exchange of ideas is welcome in safe spaces — personal and pointed acts of emotional violence are not.
I think Brown University’s Katie Byron articulates this distinction best. In her study of safe spaces and trigger warnings on college campuses, Byron writes that critics of safe spaces too often “[conflate] safety with comfort.” She suggests that “creating safe, though not necessarily comfortable, spaces allows students to express a broader range of viewpoints and the security needed to freely engage with academic material.” The debate over uncomfortable or controversial speech on college campuses, then, has no relation to the debate over safe spaces. Safe spaces prevent trauma, not general discomfort.
Ferguson conflates these two debates repeatedly. At the beginning of the article, he cites a Brookings study of college students’ perspectives on the First Amendment. But what does the study’s discussion of uncomfortable speech on campuses have to do with the prevention of trauma for minorities and survivors? Similarly, the study’s defense of hate speech as free speech does not relate to the prevention of targeted and personal attacks on students’ identities. Ferguson goes on to compliment the University of Chicago’s elimination of safe spaces from its campus. Again, the debate over comfort coincides with the debate over safety. Safe spaces do not allow students to “retreat from ideas and perspectives at odds with their own,” as Chicago’s Dean of Students John Ellison suggests. Even the defense of safe spaces which Ferguson cites makes the wrong argument — Northwestern University’s President, Morton Schapiro, discusses “uncomfortable learning” rather than student security.
More perplexing is Ferguson’s criticism of Christina Hoff Sommers’s 2015 visit to Oberlin College. Ferguson seems to contend that students’ creation of a safe space during Sommers’s speech hindered the college’s ability to “critically [consider] her views.” Rather than being for “students who disagreed with [Sommers]” as Ferguson suggests, the safe space was created for “survivors of sexualized violence.” Again, we see safe spaces used to protect the wellbeing of students struggling with trauma rather than students uncomfortable with disagreement. Moreover, Ferguson’s critique of student activists at the event itself seems to speak to his own discomfort with diverse opinions. At the event, students asked Sommers whether her controversial perspectives on rape culture amounted to rape denial. Ferguson writes that these questions failed to “[advance] discussion,” but questions like these that confront controversy directly seem critical to productive discussion.
The University should celebrate safe spaces. Contemporary debates over safe space policy — both criticism and defense — wrongfully link the question of student security with the larger question of student comfort and discourse. The conflation of these debates makes for better headlines — articles like Ferguson’s draw praise for defending the First Amendment. But minority students and the survivors of trauma deserve more than to be pawns of gratuitous partisanship. Score political points elsewhere, and leave student safety alone.
Jack Chellman is an Opinion columnist for The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.
The University’s Board of Visitors Buildings and Grounds Committee will defer a vote on the site for a softball stadium that has been proposed to be constructed at Lambeth Field, according to an email sent to Lambeth Field Apartments residents Monday evening.
The proposed stadium has proven to be controversial because some students and local residents living close to the proposed location have voiced concerns that the University has excluded them from the planning process. They have also raised questions about the potential impacts of noise, lights and parking.
Agenda materials released Monday indicated the committee was originally expected to approve an architect for the project, as well as the concept, site and design guidelines Thursday.
The email sent by a Senior Resident at Lambeth Field Apartments to students Monday said the administration will still ask the committee to approve an architect for the site, but “the vote to approve the site ... has been temporarily deferred.”
The email noted that Colette Sheehy, the University's senior vice president for operations, and the team of people involved with the project "plan to work with the design consultant to study the issues raised by Lambeth residents, specifically involving parking, noise, lights, and the creation of a new recreation field on the west side of Lambeth Field Apartments."
Charles Marsh, a Religious Studies professor who lives on University Circle, previously told The Cavalier Daily that the plans to construct the stadium at Lambeth Field have failed to address important issues that would affect the surrounding neighborhood.
“We are frankly aghast by the news and scrambling to understand how such a consequential decision was made without student involvement, community dialogue, or studies evaluating noise, lighting, parking or property value impact,” Marsh said in an email. “The stadium will undoubtedly cause great disruption to residents of Lambeth [Field] Apartments and the surrounding neighborhoods.”
The current design places home base just north of the Chesapeake & Ohio Railroad, with the first base line running parallel to the tracks. The stadium facility would be located southeast of Lambeth apartments, and the historic colonnades at Lambeth Field would encompass the outfield.
A majority of the existing parking lot at Lambeth Field would be replaced with a recreational field.
A description of the project in the agenda materials says the facility would include a home locker room, lounge doubling as a nutrition area, sports medicine room, team meeting rooms and both home and visitor bullpens.
“The goal of the project is to create a compelling team and spectator experience that is contextually thoughtful of the existing colonnade while respecting the adjoining residential properties,” the agenda reads. “Ideally, coaching and support staff offices will be located on an upper-level of the facility, and a new press box will be located above the concourse that will accommodate the scoreboard system, replay booth, and spaces for TV, radio, and print media.”
The agenda also notes that upgrades to better facilitate pedestrian and vehicle access to the stadium will need to be made.
The new stadium would allow the University to host collegiate tournaments, like the ACC and NCAA Tournaments.
University officials previously met with leaders from University Circle and Venable neighborhoods Nov. 1 to discuss the construction proposal and hear their concerns for the first time.
In an email to The Cavalier Daily, University Deputy Spokesperson Matt Charles said that the purpose of the meeting was “to provide an overview of the proposed project and to hear their concerns so that the University could incorporate this feedback into the development of the design.”
Charles has also said that potential stadium nuisances should be mitigated with new advancements in technology such as directional lighting, and utilizing the Culbreth parking garage so there wouldn’t be people parking in neighborhoods.
A meeting was also held with neighboring residents last Sunday.
Matthew Healy, a second-year College student and Lambeth resident told The Cavalier Daily he feels one of the reasons students like Lambeth is because of the existing field space. He met with other Lambeth residents, a senior resident of Lambeth and University officials involved with the project last week.
“I went into the meeting thinking they were going to ask how we were going to feel about it and just trying to get our perspective,” Healy said. “They did listen to our input and concerns, but at the same time it’s kind of late to listen to people’s concerns when they already have a plan scheduled to present it to the Board of Visitors for a vote.”
Neighboring residents say the University told them that a donor — whose name was not given — is providing the funds to construct the stadium. The University did not include a cost estimate in the committee agenda for Thursday and did not return a request for comment regarding the cost.
Two months ago, The Cavalier Daily published an article on new information related to a racial profiling claim made in 2011 against University Police officers by then-Law student Johnathan Perkins, who subsequently recanted the allegations. As a result of his recantation, Perkins was tried for an Honor code violation and acquitted by the Honor Committee. Six years later, Perkins told the The Cavalier Daily an aspect of his story he said was shared during his Honor trial but never disclosed to the public — he said the FBI was involved in the situation and pressured him to recant his claim.
Perkins said he remained silent about this side of the story due to potential charges that could have been brought against him. While the statute of limitations expired a year ago, he said he was still hesitant to speak out again with the risk of repercussions from significant authority figures.
“I had remained quiet about for six years and it involved kind of speaking the truth to very powerful actors, namely the FBI and local law enforcement generally,” Perkins said. “I didn’t know what news outlets would pick it up and I didn’t know what the response would be.”
Since the publication of The Cavalier Daily’s article two months ago, other news outlets, such as The Huffington Post, The Daily Progress, C-VILLE Weekly, ABA Journal and Above the Law, have written updated stories based on Perkins’ recent statements.
“So far, the response has been overwhelmingly positive, and people have been really kind with their words and feedback regarding the actual substance of what I shared,” Perkins said.
Perkins, who is black, believes he was the victim of race-based discrimination when two University Police officers stopped him on his walk home one night in spring 2011. The officers roughly handled him and searched his belongings, saying he “fit the description” of someone they were looking for. One of Perkins’ professor’s encouraged him to publish his story, which he ultimately did as a letter to the editor of the Virginia Law Weekly.
A month later, Perkins said he received a phone call from FBI Senior Supervisory Resident Agent Robert Hilland. Perkins said Hilland was waiting for him at his car in the Law School parking lot, accompanied by two University Police officers in charge of investigating Perkins’ claim of harassment by the University Police Department.
According to Perkins, the four went into an office at the Law School where Hilland listed all of the consequences that would ensue if Perkins maintained his claim and emphasized that it would all go away if he recanted his statement.
The interrogation lasted for more than two hours, and afterwards, Perkins said he signed a blank piece of paper detailing his recantation as dictated by Hilland. The following day, the University issued a press release explaining Perkins’ recantation, but not specifically mentioning the FBI’s involvement.
Honor Code charges were filed against Perkins for lying. His trial took place in July 2011, and he was found not guilty. He was granted his degree in September 2011, and went on to work for a Pennsylvania law firm.
Despite his acquittal, Perkins said he was called a liar and a “race-baiter,” and has had to deal with negative attention related to his case for the past six years.
“Between 2011 and now, I felt like I was living my life with the knowledge that all of this negative press and media were out there and the knowledge that so, so many people thought I was a liar and someone who would lie — of all things, about race issues — which are so important to me,” Perkins said.
Perkins said he felt a constant burden in discussing issues related to race and police harassment, knowing many people discredited his opinions. He said that changed, however, when he shared the rest of his story.
“The negative things on the Internet about me and the opinions that people held about me were occupying space in my mind and occupying a space in my everyday no matter where I went,” Perkins said. “Now that there is the full story out there, that space isn’t occupied anymore, and I can use it for other things ... I can rest knowing that I’ve done everything I can to tell me entire story.”
University Law Prof. Kim Forde-Mazrui, who Perkins spoke with shortly after both his initial encounter with the police and later the FBI, said Perkins expressed relief after sharing the rest of his story.
“I just have been very gratified by I think how liberated he feels,” Forde-Mazrui said. “For six years, it was always this thing of I could only tell people that we could trust. But now, it’s like I can tell anybody. I don’t even need to ask him, and that just shows a feeling of freedom.”
Perkins’ statements to The Cavalier Daily about the FBI’s involvement in his 2011 recantation and Honor trial gained coverage from local news outlets, including The Daily Progress and the C-VILLE Weekly. His story also gained national media attention when the Huffington Post published an article in October. The blog Above the Law, which wrote pieces about Perkins in 2011, published an updated account with Perkins’ mention of the FBI’s involvement.
The American Bar Association Journal also wrote a recent piece and Inside Higher Ed added a note about Perkins’ statement of the FBI’s involvement at the top of one of their 2011 articles, which questioned the UPD's decision not to press charges against Perkins.
Perkins said, for the most part, the responses of his friends, family and colleagues to the recent press has been positive. Perkins said people who knew about the FBI’s involvement showed solidarity with him and were outspoken in their support for him.
Perkins said he also received messages from people he had lost touch with over the years, who apologized for believing his recantation at the time and thinking he had lied. Others who had expressed at the time how upset they were that the University allowed Perkins to graduate also reached out to apologize.
“Of course I forgive them, and I don’t even know that an apology is necessary,” Perkins said. “They were reacting to what they had been told, which was that I fabricated this. I just hope that moving forward, if they encounter some situation like this that seems a little fishy, I hope that they might be a little bit more questioning.”
Perkins said he thinks the more accepting and understanding reactions to his story now are largely due to the national coverage of similar cases of police harassment and race-based discrimination. Since 2011, activist groups like Black Lives Matter have gained significant prominence.
“In 2017, the public is not surprised to hear stories of police misconduct, particularly against black men,” Perkins said. “The stories of police brutality and misconduct are just all too common, and people are becoming more and more acquainted with the way that many black people have to live their lives in America.”
In November, Perkins published an op-ed in The Marshall Project describing his story. In it, he included ways he hopes society can take steps toward fixing issues of police harassment and discrimination. Perkins said he thinks society can start by believing people of color when they say they experienced something harmful due to their race and continuing to question the facts of a story.
“Not only do I hope people will believe people of color when we … share these negative experiences, but … in cases where something doesn’t make sense, where all of sudden a young man says ‘nevermind, the police actually didn’t do anything,’” Perkins said. “I hope my story calls people to be even just a little bit more open-minded and questioning about those kinds of instances.”
Forde-Mazrui also commented on how Perkins’ story demonstrates the repercussions for speaking out against authority and the need to scrutinize all aspects of a situation.
“This shows that … people get punished in ways if they dare speak out against people who’ve abused their power against them,” Forde-Mazrui said. “I think Johnathan experienced the risk of speaking out against police … I think it’s helping to correct that and actually show maybe in the future we shouldn’t jump to the police’s side either in situations.”
Forde-Mazrui said he spoke with a number of students in the Black Law Student Association about Perkins’ story. After discussing it, some expressed an interest in having Perkins come and speak to them. The meeting has yet to occur, but Perkins said he is looking forward to speaking with Law students. He said he is eager to mend the disconnect that formed between him and the black community, particularly black law students, following his 2011 recantation and reputation as a liar and “race-baiter.”
“There was this very palpable sense … that I had betrayed [the black community], and that is a sense that I can’t blame the black community for because they were, again, going off what was being reported in the newspaper. They didn’t have any reason to doubt what they were reading,” Perkins said. “One of my biggest concerns was that other people of color wouldn’t be taken seriously when they made these complaints or allegations against law enforcement. So, to the extent that I can repair my kind of personal relationship with the Black Law student community, I’m so excited to and eager to [do so].”
Correction: The article previously misstated that the statue of limitations expired five years ago. The statue of limitations expired one year ago.