If you're here via our campus flyers, welcome! Please read over this petition, sign if you agree, and read below: As we talked about in the last update, the university needs to demonstrate tangible and direct support for the groups affected by Gianforte's rhetoric and actions. We’ve collected and researched courses of action from the 495 (as of writing) petition supporters – 106 of those that have provided reasoning: RENAMING THE BUILDING (involves administration + alumni + students): Calls for renaming the new academic complex have been mounting over the past week. As of writing, over half of the comments have requested not honoring Gianforte with naming the new building after him. This symbolic historization of his name in Stevens history – and Stevens complicity in neither condemning nor condoning his values – has signees like Robin Crownover predicting "in a few decades when Stevens has to rename the building when Gianforte's views move from merely 'controversial' to absolutely repugnant in the public view." Michael Olohan also described how Gianforte "defies the NSPE Code of Ethics through his questionable donations." Alumni or students can refuse to donate until the name is changed or removed, like Sarah Goodman, Chris Sinatra, and Jeffrety Samalot – the latter of which remarked that "Stevens will never see another dime of support from [him] until his name is gone". For how to fix this, we can look to our higher education peers; President R. Barbara Gitenstein of The College of New Jersey recommended buildings named after segregationist Paul Loser to be changed. "Since I have such personal admiration for members of the Loser family [who have donated over $6 million, the largest private donation in the school's history], I come to this conclusion with sadness but without regret," Gitenstein stated in a message posted on the TCNJ website. [1] The school's 18-member commission looking at Loser's legacy, along with giving their students various choices for new building names, is a marked example of institutional reflection and leadership as a university that strives for diversity Current Stevens Gift Policy includes a Due Diligence section, which reads, “in thinking about acceptance of a gift, a gift officer should consider… the historic and current reputation of the prospective donor, the current and future needs of the university, and perceived, potential, or real conflicts of interest” [3]. Considering Gianforte’s actions and donation history , along with similar debacles in the building naming at Montana State University, Stevens can both (a) acknowledge and condemn Gianforte’s problematic actions and donations and (b) take a similar route as TCNJ, look at its own history of exemplary leaders in STEM in conjunction with its student body and Samuel C Williams Library staff, and send out a survey to change the name to something that better represents the current and future student population SAFE ZONE TRAINING REFORM (student orgs + administration) Stevens currently has in place The Stevens Safe Zone Ally Program, a “campus-wide initiative designed to educate Stevens community members on LGBTQ+ identity, as well as, visibly identify Stevens staff, students, and faculty who seek to support the campus' LGBTQ population.” There is, however, a lack of transparency in regards to the success and impact it is having on the Stevens community. With the absence of any Stevens based research being conducted on the program and lack of any success stories being published about it, the Safe Zone Ally Program leaves the risk of being ineffective at sufficiently “provide[ing] a foundation of knowledge needed to be an effective ally to LGBTQ+ students” as stated on Safe Zone webpage [2]. This can be an opportunity to include many facets of already-existing structures on campus. The following steps is an example of how to do so: (1) Stevens should hold an open forum for LGBTQ+ students and allies in which they can provide input on what Safe Zone initiatives are successful and what work still needs to be done to meet their needs and concerns. In addition, this event should require mandatory attendance by SGA senators and cabinet members in order to reinforce the fact they they are representing all subsets of the Stevens student body. The SGA should also form an ad-hoc committee that is includes SGA senators as well as interested Stevens students which can create an anonymous survey as well for this input. (2) The ad-hoc committee should work in conjunction with Stevens Torch to research higher education Safe Zone training initiatives that are successful and use this to create new campus-wide standards for safe zone training with the input of the student body. This should be co-signed as an SGA proclamation. (3) The SGA should add a Safe Zone Training session to their semesterly Leadership Connect conferences certifying that all organizations have representatives who have gone through Safe Zone Training. Safe zone training should also be included during freshman orientation. In addition, all faculty should have mandatory safe zone training. The training should also be a continually improving and evolving program using the feedback from the student body through open forums and the anonymous survey as well the research conducted by the ad-hoc committee and Torch. This information should also be used to influence new initiatives such as the relaunch of the Lore-el Center and LGBTQ+ live/learn communities. No matter how they accomplish a transparent conversation, it is vital that we recognize this as an opportunity to address any "[hypocrisy] about being progressive and inclusive" (current student Pratik Patel), "prove we have higher standards than this" (alumnus Geraldine Mabagos), and continue what honorary Stevens M.E., and a Christian and gay, has taught during his forty-five year tenure as a faculty member: to "[focus] on the fundamental need in a democratic society to accept the 'other' – whoever they may be, whatever they may believe." Community members can promote this ideal by directly contacting Stevens leaders and administrators, as found under "HERE'S WHAT YOU CAN DO" part of our petition. Alumni and current students have the strongest voice in this effort as Stevens depends on them for support. Whether you wish our administration deliver actions to “make the campus a more inclusive place" (Ethan Crump, '16) or believe that “choosing money over a safe place for our students who might identify as LGBTQ is a crime” (current student Natalie Pertuz) your thoughts are invaluable and have power, as long as you voice them! With the annual Alumni Weekend this weekend, the administration cannot refuse this campus-wide call anymore. They must act now or face the danger of further loss of alumni support, student apathy towards the university, and being complicit to the rise of a violent and discriminatory politician; in responding to our three points, they must support those who have been passed the torch – not force their hand to set fire to any chance of meaningful inclusivity. [1] http://www.nj.com/mercer/index.ssf/2017/05/tcnj_president_recommends_renaming_building_named.html [2] https://www.stevens.edu/campus-life/diversity-and-inclusion/lgbtq-resources-and-support[ [3] https://www.stevens.edu/sites/stevens_edu/files/Gift-Policy.pdf