Volume Cll, Number 33
Seventy-Fifth Year of Publication
trojan
University of Southern California
1912 — 1986
Thursday, October 16, 1986
Faculty Senate discusses	University sets goals
handbook, Proposition 6i Endowment fund to be raised
By Karen Martinez
Staff Writer
Discussing nepotism and salary disputes, the Faculty Senate opened its doors to the academic community for the first time this year at its October meeting at the Dorothy and Hugh Edmonson faculty center, on the Health Sciences campus.
MICHAEL KIM DAILY TROJAN
Gerald Fleisher, Faculty Senate president, addresses the senate during their meeting on the Health Sciences campus.
Normally the senate meets in the faculty center on the main campus, but due to renovation of the facility, the senate decided to meet on the Health Sciences campus, said Gerald Fleischer, president of the Faculty Senate.
"It demonstrates the integration of the University of Southern California faculties," Fleischer said.
Faculty members from both campuses filled the faculty center to capacity as their discussion began on issues such as nepotism, Proposition 61, and changes in the faculty handbook.
The senate announced that it wished to "go on record to the media," to defend the faculty's stance on Proposition 61, which sets a limit on the salaries of state-compensated researchers and teachers. The senators felt that setting a $49,000 limit on the salaries of researchers and teachers compensated by the state would devastate the educational process.
Senate members voted to join Stanford University in its stance against the proposal.
Senator John L. Callaghan, chairman of the academic policies committee, submitted a statement to be added to the Faculty Handbook and to the new University Catalogue, which disallows family members to teach close relatives.
The proposal began, "In general, students should not be taught by, or otherwise be under the academic supervision of a family member or significant other."
Exceptions would be made if a family member was the only one with the expertise to aid in the education of another family member, but another faculty (Continued on page 3)
By Lori Grange
Staff Writer
Increasing the university's endowment fund has become an administrative top priority this year, and with good reason: failure to build the fund could result in a continued dependence on tuition increases and government monies.
The endowment pool, now a $297.3 million venture, funds only five percent of university expenditures, according to Ann Patterson, senior staff associate for the Office of Budget and Planning.
"Endowments don't play a big part in funding the university, and they need to," she said.
The university has not had problems in accruing endowments in the past, but it simply has not devoted enough attention to the fund, said James Appleton, vice president of development.
"It's simply that needs in the capital area and program support required so much time that attention was not given to the endowment fund. There have been high priority needs in a variety of areas, and now it's important to give increased attention to building endowments," Appleton said.
Endowments may not be as attractive to donors as other gifts such as building donations, because results are not as immediate, Patterson said.
"(Endowment) is the hardest money to raise. It's so much easier to ask someone for money
Officials to discuss authority, dissent in Catholic Church
By Cari Meisinger
Staff writer •
The Rev. Charles Curran, professor of religion at the Catholic University of America, and the Most Rev. Roger Mahony, archbishop of Los Angeles, will discuss authority and dissent in the Roman Catholic Church tonight in Bovard Auditorium.
Rev. Curran recently came into the spotlight when he got
Rev. Charles Curran
direct orders from the Vatican to stop teaching at the Catholic University in Washington D.C. because of his unorthodox views on contraception, abortion, and homosexuality.
Since the Catholic University of America is a pontifical institution organized by a papal charter, the Vatican took a special interest in Curran and his beliefs.
Everything taught at the Catholic University, which is under the direct authority of the Vatican, is supposed to reflect the pope's views. Since Curran's views did not, he was removed.
Although Curran has not been formally denied the right to teach at other Catholic institutions, he said "realistically, I would be unable to teach theology at any Catholic university."
The lecture tonight is not a debate, stressed Don Miller, director of the School of Religion. Instead, Curran and Mahony will speak for 20 minutes each, then answer questions for 20 to 30 minutes.
Curran will discuss the role of dissent focusing on his personal experiences within a historical context, Miller said.
Mahony will represent the church's view and is expected to
defend its actions against Curran, he said.
Miller said this is the first time an American archbishop has met on the same platform with Curran since the church's action, and it will undoubtedly be a major event.
The discussion, sponsored by the School of Religion and the Program Board, takes place tonight at 7:30 p.m.
for a building," she said.
The endowment fund finances three main areas: faculty chairs, student aid, and program research. With the beginning of the $557 million development campaign recently announced by university president James Zumberge, the university will be paying attention — $223 million worth — to making endowments a significant financial resource for these areas, Appleton said.
Campaign officials hope to raise $75 million to create 49 new endowed faculty chairs, strengthening the current total of 124 positions.
The earnings from the endowment provide income for the chairs, which in turn provide high-ranking professors with salaries relative to their specific worth. A chair's endowment can also provide funding for the professor's research and teaching equipment and the salaries of graduate students, according to a campaign brochure.
Officials are seeking another $41 million in endowments for student aid, "to be able to attract and sustain the best students
possible," Appleton said. The university now has some 12,000 students who are awarded more than $110 million in aid annually.
Another $65 million in endowments is being sought for research and programs, the brochure states.
"The emphasis on endowments in the campaign is the most encouraging thing I've seen in the budgeting process in a long time. It looks at longterm, quality improvements," Patterson said.
The university ranked 24th in the nation in 1985 for endowment fund amounts, according to Business Officer magazine. The University of Texas headed the list; with a $2.9 billion fund. The discrepancy makes the endowment pool "the single strongest missing element" at the university, said Dennis Dougherty, vice president of finance.
"Having that kind of endowment fund makes a big difference in the impact of an institution," he said.
Dougherty was not alone in placing significance on the value (Continued on page 2)
Rev. Roger Mahoney, archbishop of Los Angeles
Program Board to accept all corporate sponsorship
By Danielle Sanford
Staff Writer
Despite the recent Student Senate decision recommending full divestment, the Program Board voted Tuesday night to accept corporate sponsorship from all companies, including any with investments in South Africa.
"We will be accepting sponsorship from any corporation," said Carol Silberman, executive director of the Program Board.
The Program Board compiled a list of 1,000 corporate sponsors. Out of the top 60 companies, (the ones most likely to sponsor the Program Board), about half had investments in South Africa, said Christopher Wood, director of the Gay and Lesbian Student Assembly.
Along with the decision to accept all corporate sponsorship, the Program Board rejected a proposal initiated by Wood that would have allowed the board to, "accept only corporate sponsors from those companies with no direct investments in South Africa," Wood said.
"(The proposal) did not get into the Sullivan Principles and accept one or two rated companies," Wood said. Rather, companies with no investments would have been the only ones accepted.
Wood created the proposal after the recent Student Senate decision to recommend full divestment. He was concerned that the Program Board would not be allied with the senate.
"I didn't want people to think we were hypocritical," Wood said.
Because they felt the Program Board should not be a political body, members decided to accept all sponsors regardless of their investments in South Africa.
"They felt this would be a political statement. . .We are here for all students and we don't know whether all students are for or against divestment," Silberman said.
The main concern of the Progam Board is student programming. If the Program Board loses corporate sponsorship, it may affect programs, Silberman said.
In the past, the Program Board has gained approximately $15,000 per year from corporate sponsors. However, Silberman said, the Program Board is starting a big sponsorship push this year.
"We'd like to shoot for $100,000, but that may not be possible," Wood said. The amount of sponsorship is not predictable from year to year, Silberman said.
Both Wood and Silberman feel that the decision to accept all sponsors is a "positive step."
"At least we looked at it. We've set up a base for upcoming directors to have an open mind about these issues," Silberman said.
"We've made a conscious decision for the year." she said.
Although the proposal was defeated, some members, who were representing their constituencies, did have personal views on the issue.