CRAIG STEWART/DAILY TROJAN Through a fluke in the academic calendar, this year's commencement ceremonies will be on Friday the 13th, but it doesn't seem to be bothering most of the graduates.
Friday 13th omen no worry to grads
By Susan Shaw
Staff Writer
On Friday, May 13, approximately 6,400 students, dressed soberly in black, will take what may be one of the most important walks of their Lives.
One does not need clairvoyant insight or a crystal ball to realize that many of these students — members of the university's 100th graduating class — will be suffering from acute nervousness, possibly brought on by an irrational fear of the unknown.
But what of Friday the 13th, the double-hexed day? Perhaps it has crossed the minds of some graduating seniors that this much anticipated day falls on this ill-omened day.
Yet the upcoming graduates themselves are rather nonchalant about the ordeal. "I don't worry about such things," said one senior, who wished to remain anonymous, of the superstition that surrounds that day. "I'll be lucky just to get a job," she said.
(Continued on page 25)
rojan
Volume XCIII, Number 67	University of Southern California Wednesday, April 27, 1983
Decision on football seating: students lose in 3-year plan
By Joann Galardy
Staff Writer
The administration announced Tuesday that it will carry through its plans to deny students over 1,500 prime seats at football games in the coliseum in favor of the wishes of "special" university donors.
Under the provisions of the plan which was approved Monday, students will not immediately lose any seats, but their seats will gradually be shifted into less desirable sections of the coliseum. This will be done in order to create a new priority seating section which the university feels will generate increased income from alumni who donate more than $12,000 to the university.
The proposed changes, which will take three years to complete, will evolve as follows:
During the 1983-84 football season, the plan which the student senate proposed to the administration in March will be put into effect. Under this plan, students will continue to occupy seats between tunnels 22 and 23 from rows 1 through 37, a loss of seven rows since 1982. Rows 38 through 44, formerly part of the student section, will be combined with existing al-
umni seating in rows 45 through 54 in order to create the new priority section.
During the second year, the student section between tunnels 22 and 23 would run from rows 1 through about 22, a loss of 15 rows since the first year of the plan. A new student seating section would be created between tunnels 21 and 22 in rows A through 9, which amounts to an addition of 10 rows of student seating in this area.
In the third and final year of the plan, the student section between tunnels 22 and 23 would run from rows A through 9. Student seating would be shifted to the section between tunnels 20 and 21, rows 1 through 10.
There remains considerable question, however, that the plan will ever reach its three-year completion under the current guidelines.
University President James Zumberge said, "I am regarding the plan put forth by the students as a first step. I am reluctant to move forward with full implementation until I am assured that it will generate revenue."
During the first year of the proposed plan, Zumberge intends to conduct a thorough
examination of all coliseum seating. He is interested in looking at the number of complimentary tickets given out with specific attention being given to those who receive these tickets, why thev receive them and w'here the complimentary seats are located.
In explaining why he feels the investigation is necessary Zumberge said, "There has to be some rational basis for the distribution of complimentary tickets."
The administration began debating the seating issue nearly two months ago in light of the announcement made by the Coliseum Commission detailing plans to move the playing field 4.7 yards to the east in order to accommodate the installation of a new track for the 1984 Olympics.
The plan finally decided upon represents a compromise between the university's desire to provide better seating to those people who donate to the uniyersitv and the students' desire to keep the prime seating which they feel they are entitled to.
In a letter sent to student senate President Dan Dunmoyer, Zumberge said, "I believe we have arrived at a reso-(Continued on page 11)
University Center still needs final approval
By Brenda Wong
Staff Writer
Three years ago students passed a referendum calling for the construction of the University Center, a campus recreational facility to be used primarily by students. Since then, very little progress had been reported until two weeks ago when the University Center Planning Committee submitted a final report on the proposed complex to university President James Zumberge.
The committee recommended that the University Center be built over or adjacent to the McDonald's swimming stadium, which is now under construction near the northwest comer of campus.
The concept of the University Center has been tossed around before and after the referendum passed by 86 percent of the votes. It proposed that the center be funded in half by students.
Today, three years later, the idea has been formalized in writing in the form of the report, and it is now resting on Zumberge's desk.
Questions have arisen as to who will control the use of the proposed complex and to how the facility should be designed. Zumberge, who is responsible for the giving the go ahead on construction, appears to favor the project, with reservations.
"There's no question we need more recreational facilities, but the question then becomes 'How do we satisfy these needs?' " Zumberge said.
"The University Center is their (the committee's) impression of how you satisfy these unfilled needs. I'm not convinced that it's the only way."
Two months ago, Zumberge requested a report from the University Center committee asking the committee to address four questions and to
draw some final conclusions. The four questions involved the proposed rationale for the structure, the structural concepts, cost estimate and how the fadlity would be funded.
Zumberge received the report two weeks ago and has not yet made a response. "I haven't put it on a top priority of my
schedule of thought since I had a committee working on it," he said.
Zumberge and the university's Board of Trustees will make the final dedsion on the construction of a recreational facility at some later date.
"I will respond after I've met with the committee because
they spedficallv asked to be given the opportunity to meet with me to clarify or elaborate or explain some of the point: they made," Zumberge said.
"Before I'm willing to accept this, I have to be sure that we haven't passed options that are more cost effective, that will do the job as well or better," Zumberge said.
The report submitted by the committee stated that many students find the campus and its surroundings lacking in so-dal and recreational opportunities.
"It is our further assessment that, when compared to student facilities on other West Coast campuses, USC facilities are totally inadequate,” the report stated.
Another alternative to the University Center is to look at what other campuses are doing as far as recreation is concerned.
The construction of the University Center is one step toward creating a better campus environment, the report said. The total construction cost of the swimming pool and the University Center is close to S15 million.
(Continued on page 8)
Final DT
This issue marks the final Daily Trojan under the editorship of Mark Gill. Publication will resume August 30 under Marc Ig-ler.
Plans for the University Center, a proposed S15 million student recreation facility, have been reviewed by a spedal committee and their findings now sit on the desk of university’ President James Zumberge. Pending final approval by Zumberge, the Board of Trustees and the allocation of funds, construction may begin in the fall of 1984.