Occupy UM protesters walking toward the Fleming administration building prior to the Dec. 15 regents meeting, where they protested against the high cost of public education. Flyers taped to The Cube repeated the same theme. (Photos by the writer.)

As UM president Mary Sue Coleman began her opening remarks to start Thursday’s meeting, about two dozen “Occupy UM” protesters, who’d been sitting in the boardroom, stood up and shouted, “Mic check!” For the next five minutes, in a call-and-response delivery, protesters outlined their grievances against the university’s leadership – primarily, that once-affordable public education has been turned into an expensive commodity. [A video of the protest is posted on YouTube.]

When the group finished, they left the boardroom chanting “Instruction, not construction!” Neither the regents nor Coleman responded to them or alluded to the protest during the rest of the meeting.

Another group of students gave a decidedly different performance just minutes later. The a cappella group Amazin’ Blue sang five holiday songs, prompting board chair Denise Ilitch to don a blue Santa’s hat – embroidered with “Michigan” – and sing along.

The meeting included two issues related to the Ann Arbor community and parking. During public commentary, Chip Smith of the Near Westside Neighborhood Association highlighted problems with a UM parking lot that’s surrounded by homes on the Old West Side. And in a staff memo accompanying a resolution to issue bonds for capital projects, Fuller Road Station was on the list in the category of projects that would require final approval by regents prior to being funded with bond proceeds. The regents had approved the controversial project – a joint UM/city of Ann Arbor parking structure, bus depot and possible train station – in January 2010, but a formal agreement between the city and university has not yet been finalized.

Other items on the Dec. 15 agenda included: (1) presentations by three UM faculty who were named MacArthur Fellows this year; (2) approval of the Michigan Investment in New Technology Startups (MINTS) initiative; and (3) approval of several renovation projects, including work on the Law School’s historic Charles T. Munger Residences in the Lawyers’ Club and the John P. Cook Building.

Occupy UM “Mic Check”

Occupy UM is one of several local groups formed since the Occupy Wall Street movement started earlier this year. [Other groups include Occupy Ann Arbor and Occupy For All – described on its website as a "merry band of roving peaceniks based in Ann Arbor."]

This Occupy UM protester read a statement to the regents that was repeated in unison by other protesters in the boardroom.

Before the regents meeting, Occupy UM held a rally at The Cube, located in the plaza next to the Fleming administration building, where the regents meet. After the rally, Occupy UM supporters entered Fleming and took seats throughout the boardroom before the start of the meeting.

The agenda begins with remarks from UM president Mary Sue Coleman, and as soon as she began speaking the protesters stood and shouted “Mic check!” – which launched the start of a technique used by Occupy protesters nationwide to propagate a message to a crowd without the aid of a microphone.

The five-minute call-and-response recitation – shouted by a leader in short phrases, and repeated in unison by the other two dozen or so protesters – sharply criticized the regents and university leaders for a range of actions and inactions that have resulted in a cost of education that’s inaccessible for many. They referred to the meeting’s agenda, saying it reflected the values of funding start-up businesses and construction projects rather than accessible education.

An excerpt:

There was once affordable public education. / Today / there is only an expensive commodity. / You sell this commodity to wealthy students. / To the rest of us you offer / a more ominous exchange: / an education / for a lifetime of student debt.

…

You endeavor to attract the richest and whitest / not the best and brightest. / You support construction not instruction. / We have another vision. / Job security and intellectual freedom / for faculty and staff; / a student body without student debt; / and a community that shatters race and class divisions / instead of reproducing them./

This university claims to be / an institution of inclusion and equality. / Our vision works for the future / when this may be true. / Your vision ensures / a public forever divided. / We reject your vision! [.pdf of full Occupy UM statement]

When they finished, the protesters continued chanting “Instruction, not construction!” as they left the room. Their chants could be heard as Coleman resumed her opening remarks, which highlighted the Dec. 18 winter commencement on Sunday, where New York Times executive editor Jill Abramson would give the keynote speech. Coleman also noted several faculty achievements, and gave well wishes for students during finals and for the UM football team at the Sugar Bowl. The meeting continued without any mention of the protesters by regents or UM executives.

However, the following day – Friday, Dec. 16 – a letter from Coleman to President Barack Obama was released, addressing the same issue of affordable education. The letter was tied to Obama’s recent meeting with university presidents at the White House, which Coleman did not attend. From the letter:

By bringing together higher education leaders to discuss college affordability, you have elevated a thorny issue that demands a national conversation because of its impact on all sectors of society. The cost of attending college is one of the most serious matters facing a country that seeks to strengthen its global competitiveness. How we resolve this dilemma requires collaboration, sacrifice and hard choices.

…

Higher education is a public good currently lacking public support. There is no stronger trigger for rising costs at public universities and colleges than declining state support. The University of Michigan and our state’s 14 other public institutions have been ground zero for funding cuts. The state’s significant disinvestment in higher education has been challenging: a 15 percent cut in the last year alone, and a reduction of more than 30 percent over the last decade.

We have worked extremely hard to mitigate the impact of these cuts on students and families. We must and will do more, but also offer recommendations that may benefit all of higher education.

Recommendations in the letter included: urging states to reinvest in public colleges and universities, asking the business community to lobby for increased government funding of higher education, increasing private support, and cutting costs.

Student, Faculty Awards

Provost Phil Hanlon gave a presentation about the various awards and other honors that UM’s faculty have received, as well as introducing and congratulating Alex Carney, a UM senior who recently was named a Marshall Scholar – one of only 36 students in the U.S. awarded the scholarship to study in Oxford and Cambridge. Carney – a mathematician, violinist and cross-country runner – received a round of applause.

Tiya Miles, chair of UM’s department of Afroamerican and African studies and a 2011 MacArthur Fellow.

After cataloguing the range of honors for UM faculty – including Guggenheim Fellowships, the Carnegie Foundation’s U.S. professors of the year, and election to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, among others – Hanlon introduced three faculty members who had been named MacArthur Fellows this year: Tiya Miles, Melanie Sanford, and Yukiko Yamashita.

Each of the three professors spoke to the regents, describing their work and the support they’ve received at UM. Miles, chair of UM’s department of Afroamerican and African studies, talked about the interdisciplinary nature of her research, working in the program in American culture, the department of Afroamerican and African studies, the department of history, and the Native American studies program. She recalled a challenge several years ago when she was pregnant with twins and needed to take medical leave. A book she’d been working on wasn’t completed, and she said she could imagine a scenario in which she’d be left to fail. But she had wonderful department chairs, Miles said, and senior women faculty who reached out to her. Thanks to that support, her book was eventually published and received awards, and her daughters are now eight years old.

Sanford, an Arthur F. Thurnau professor of chemistry, described her work as developing new ways to make common chemicals in a more environmentally friendly fashion, with less waste. The research has potential to impact a range of industries, from pharmaceuticals to beauty products. She said she couldn’t do the work without the amazing undergraduate and graduate students that UM attracts. “That is really the strength of this university,” Sanford said. She also praised UM’s efforts to recruit and retain women in traditionally underrepresented fields, like chemistry. There’s tremendous diversity in the chemistry department, she said, making it a dynamic and exciting place to work, with fantastic research being conducted.

After Sanford’s remarks, regent Andy Richner asked how to make a plastic cup out of corn. “That’s easy,” Sanford quipped, and quickly described how to do it. She said her lab is working on ways to do this kind of thing more efficiently, with less energy.

Yamashita spoke next, saying that she’s a stem cell biologist but “that’s not as controversial as it sounds.” That is, her work uses adult – not embryonic – stem cells. The research is very, very basic, Yamashita said, using fruit flies. But it lays the foundation to find cures for degenerative diseases, for example, or cancer. She described basic research as like a baby: You don’t get rid of a baby because it can’t yet walk or talk. The university is very supportive of her work, Yamashita said. There are great mentors, she said, who know just the right amount of leash to use on junior faculty – not too much, nor too little.

Start-Up Tech Investment

A new initiative – the Michigan Investment in New Technology Startups (MINTS) was on the agenda for approval by regents at the Dec. 15 meeting. Plans for the initiative had been announced in early October by UM president Mary Sue Coleman in her annual address to campus.

Managed by UM’s investment office as well as the technology transfer office, the program involves investing in start-up companies formed using UM technology. It’s estimated that over 10 years, the program will invest about $25 million from the university’s long-term portfolio. According to a staff memo, the investments would be part of the portfolio’s venture capital sub-portfolio. A limit of up to $500,000 would be made in any single round of financing.

In addition to approval for the overall program, regents also were asked to approve guidelines for MINTS. [.pdf of MINTS guidelines]

Tim Slottow, UM’s chief financial officer, praised Erik Lundberg, the university’s chief investment officer, and Ken Nisbet, executive director of UM’s tech transfer office, for their work in putting together this program. Slottow described it as a breakthrough type of funding that doesn’t exist at any other university. With regental approval, the university will begin investing “as soon as we can,” Slottow said.

Outcome: Regents unanimously approved the MINTS initiative and guidelines.

Building & Renovation Projects

Regents were asked to approve several items related to building and renovation projects on the Ann Arbor campus, including renovations of the law school residences, an overhaul of the University Hospital’s Trauma Burn Unit, and issuance of bids for an addition to the G.G. Brown building on north campus.

Building & Renovation Projects: Law School Residences

Regents were asked to approve the schematic design for a renovation of the Law School’s historic Charles T. Munger Residences in the Lawyers’ Club and the John P. Cook Building. The residences house about 260 students and were built in the early 1920s.

Lee Becker of Hartman-Cox Architects describes the schematic design for the UM Law School residences.

Regents had previously authorized the overall project at their March 2011 meeting. That meeting had included  a unanimous vote to name The Lawyers Club dormitory in honor of Charles T. Munger, who gave the university $20 million toward renovations of the building. The March 2011 meeting also included a vote to approve a $39 million renovation of The Lawyers Club and the John P. Cook buildings – part of a larger expansion and renovation effort at UM’s law school.

Washington, D.C.-based Hartman-Cox Architects, working with SmithGroup, is handling the project’s design. Lee Becker of Hartman-Cox attended the Dec. 15 meeting and showed regents examples of the renovation work they’ve planned. Most of the work will be interior changes to the residences – such as opening up connections between the townhouse-style dorms so that hallways will run through all the units. One of the main goals is to build better community among the law school students, he said.

Becker noted that the renovations will allow the university to skip roughly $30 million in maintenance it would otherwise need to perform in the dorms. Other work will include removing the fireplaces, adding air conditioning, installing elevators, replacing the roof, restoring masonry and refurbishing leaded glass windows.

Tim Slottow, UM’s chief financial officer, mentioned that the renovations would bring the buildings up to the same energy efficiency standards as other UM facilities. Examples of specific changes addressing energy efficiency include low-flow fixtures to conserve water, insulation, energy-efficient light fixtures and thermostat setback controls in each room.

Regent Libby Maynard asked where the students will live during the renovations, which will take about 18 months and be finished in mid-2013. Hank Baier, UM’s associate vice president for facilities and operations, reported that the university is leasing space in several apartment complexes that are close to central campus.

Regent Andy Richner noted that he had lived there when he went to law school, and he supported the project. Mary Sue Coleman said she couldn’t be more pleased with the new design, calling it one of the most precious buildings in the country.

 Outcome: Regents voted to approved the renovations at the Law School dorms.

Building & Renovation Projects: Trauma Burn Unit

A $3.33 million renovation for the University Hospital’s Trauma Burn Unit was on the agenda for approval. Renovations of the roughly 6,600-square-foot facility include improved lighting for care within the patient rooms, improved treatment rooms, creation of a dedicated physical therapy and occupational therapy room, and creation of a faculty on-call room.

Project and Design Management LLC, an architectural firm based in Ferndale, will design the project. According to a staff memo, a phased construction schedule is planned to minimize disruption to operations and patient care, with construction to be completed in the fall of 2012.

Outcome: Regents approved the trauma burn unit renovations.

Building & Renovation Projects: G.G. Brown

On the agenda was an item that would authorize university staff to issue bids and award construction contracts for a $46 million addition to the  G.G. Brown Memorial Laboratories Mechanical Engineering building on UM’s north campus.

A schematic design for the 62,500-square-foot addition was approved by regents a year ago, at the board’s Dec. 17, 2010 meeting. Construction is expected to be complete by mid-2014. The addition will house research labs, and faculty and graduate student offices for emerging research areas, including bio-systems, energy systems, and nano-systems.

Outcome: The board voted to authorize the issuance of bids and the awarding of construction contracts for the G.G. Brown addition.

In addition, as an item of information, regents were presented with UM’s annual capital outlay request to the state for fiscal 2013. For the Ann Arbor campus, that request included funding for renovations of the existing G.G. Brown building – a separate project from the planned addition. At previous meetings, Tim Slottow – UM’s chief financial officer – has said that UM expects to receive $30 million in funding for the renovation as part of the state capital outlay bill. At the Dec. 15 meeting, he didn’t specify any anticipated dollar amount, but said he hopes the state will help with this project and two others at UM’s Flint and Dearborn campuses.

Long-Term Bonds

Regents were asked to authorize the issuance of up to $280 million in general revenue bonds to fund a variety of capital projects. Tim Slottow, UM’s chief financial officer, briefly introduced the item, saying that UM needs to refinance some of its existing $200 million in commercial paper and provide longer-term financing for authorized capital projects.

A staff memo included a list of projects that require financing:

• Alice Crocker Lloyd Hall renovation
• Crisler Arena expansion and renovation
• C.S. Mott Children’s and Von Voigtlander Women’s Hospitals, and related projects
• Institute for Social Research addition
• Vera B. Baits Houses II renewal
• Seven projects for the UM Hospitals and Health Centers: (1) Simpson Circle parking structure improvements; (2) University Hospital accelerator replacement; (3) University Hospital computed tomography angiography; (4) University Hospital kitchen renovations for room service protocol; (5) University Hospital medical procedure unit expansion; (6) University Hospital radiation oncology simulator replacement; and (7) University Hospital Trauma Burn Unit renovations.

In a separate category, three projects were listed as requiring final approval by regents prior to being funded with bond proceeds:

• Fuller Road Station
• UM  Hospitals and Health Centers – A. Alfred Taubman Health Care Center internal medicine renovations
• UM Hospitals and Health Centers – A. Alfred Taubman Health Care Center Levels 1 and 2 backfill renovations

Regents had approved the Fuller Road Station project at their January 2010 meeting, when they had also authorized appointing an architect. From the staff memo provided to the regents at that 2010 meeting:

The first phase of the development of this major intermodal transportation complex is the Fuller Road Station project which includes site preparation and construction of an intermodal facility that includes: four covered bus loading/unloading zones and waiting areas; a covered area for bike hoops and lockers; parking for 1,000 vehicles (78 percent for university and 22 percent for city use); improvements to Fuller Road immediately adjacent to the site for vehicle access; and upgrades to the multi-use path along Fuller Road.

The university will manage the construction of the Fuller Road Station project. That includes building the facility on city property, following city code review and inspection, and collaborating with the city for their approval of design. This project is unique since we would be constructing the facility on city-owned property and following city building codes. We will also need approval for the lease on city-owned land since it would be for a period of greater than ten years. We will seek approval of the lease at a later date, but prior to seeking bids or awarding construction contracts for the project. A parking structure operation and maintenance agreement will be developed concurrently with design of the project. The City of Ann Arbor will manage the site preparation at an estimated cost of $3,000,000. In addition, at the City’s expense, they will undertake an environmental assessment of the property. Although there will be a temporary loss of some leased parking spaces during construction, there will be an increase of approximately 780 university parking spaces as a result of this project.

The estimated cost of the project is $46,550,000. Costs will be shared between the University of Michigan and the City of Ann Arbor in proportion to the number of parking spaces available to each (78 percent and 22 percent respectively). Total university funding, not to exceed $36,309,000 (78 percent), will be provided from Parking resources. The construction cash flow may be provided, all or in part, by increasing the commercial paper issuance under the commercial paper program, secured by a pledge of General Revenues, and authorized by the Board of Regents. The parking structure consulting firm of Walker Parking Consultants will design the project. Design is scheduled to begin immediately, and we will return with a construction schedule when we seek approval of schematic design.

At that January 2010 meeting, James D’Amour – a member of the executive committee for the Huron Valley Group of the Sierra Club – spoke out against the project, objecting to it being built on city-owned property that had been designated as parkland. He and other community members have been vocal in their objections to the structure, primarily at public meetings of the Ann Arbor city council and the Ann Arbor park advisory commission – most recently at PAC’s November 2011 meeting. [See Chronicle coverage: "More Concerns Aired on Fuller Road Station"] Regents have not discussed the project at their board meetings since the January 2010 vote.

Outcome: Without discussion, regents authorized the issuance of general revenue bonds. 

Annual Lease Report

As an item of information, regents were provided with an annual report on leases held by the university that exceed 50,000 square feet. Tim Slottow, UM’s chief financial officer, noted that there was very little change from the 2010 report, made at the regents’ Dec. 17, 2010 meeting.

There are currently five leases for space over 50,000 square feet:

• 222,775 square feet at the Domino’s Farms complex, used by various UM Health System departments.
• 125,815 square feet at the KMS Building on South State Street, used by UMHS and leased from Kosmos Associates.
• 65,693 square feet at 325 East Eisenhower Parkway leased from Burlington Property LLC for use by Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Spine Rehabilitation and the Dental School.
• 63,920 square feet at 2301 Commonwealth Boulevard, for use by UMHS and leased from First Properties Associates.
• 51,534 square feet at 1051 North Canton Center Road in Canton, leased from Saltz Center for the UMHS Canton Health Center.

Appointment of UMHS Development Officer

As a supplemental agenda item, regents were asked to approve the appointment of Brian Lally to a newly created position: associate vice president for medical development and alumni relations for the UM Health System. Jerry May, UM’s vice president for development, told the regents that the university had been doing a search to fill this new position for more than a year, with the goal of dramatically increasing fundraising for UMHS. Lally will report jointly to May and Ora Pescovitz, UM’s executive vice president for medical affairs.

Lally most recently has served as vice president of development and alumni relations for Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center and Dartmouth Medical School.

Outcome: Regents unanimously approved Lally’s appointment.

Conflict-of-Interest Items

At each monthly meeting, regents are asked to authorize items that require disclosure under the state’s Conflict of Interest statute. The law requires that regents vote on potential conflict-of-interest disclosures related to university staff, faculty or students.

The items often involve technology licensing agreements or leases. This month, the eight separate items included four research agreements, one subcontract agreement, one licensing agreement, one licensing option agreement, and one business transaction. Companies involved are: ONL Therapeutics; Emerging Micro Systems Inc.; CytoPherx Inc.; CSquared Innovations; Arbor Ultrasound Technologies; ISSYS Inc.; and Red Poppy Floral Design.

Outcome: Without comment, regents unanimously authorized the conflict-of-interest disclosures.

Student Government Report

In his regular report to the board, DeAndree Watson – president of the Michigan Student Assembly – explained the reasoning behind the organization’s upcoming name change. As of Jan. 1, the MSA will be called the Central Student Government. In 2010, students had voted to change the constitution of their student government, creating three separate branches that mirrored the federal system: executive, legislative and judicial. The legislative branch is known as the Assembly, and the overall government name was changed to distinguish itself from that branch. The name will also serve to distinguish the central student government, which represents students campuswide, with the various student governments for each school or college within UM.

Regent Andrea Fischer Newman asked Watson if he’d considered possible confusion with Central Michigan University. Watson replied that he had been part of the group that had rewritten the constitution, and that had settled on the new name. The word “Central” had been meant to signify a “central voice” for all students, he said. The only concern they’d heard about it was from one student who felt it might disenfranchise students on UM’s north campus. The official name will be the University of Michigan Central Student Government, he said.

Misc. Communications

Stephen Forrest, UM’s vice president for research, told regents that the university’s formal policies and procedures had been completed for the return of Native American human remains and associated materials in UM’s collections under the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). Responding to a follow-up query from The Chronicle, David Lampe – executive director of research communications – reported that the 75-page document formally specifies details of all of the policies and procedures that UM has adopted to handle the requirements of the act. It has been submitted to UM’s Office of the General Counsel for final approval – it will eventually be posted online.

Public Commentary

During public commentary at the end of the meeting, Chip Smith introduced himself as a UM alum and donor, and a representative of the Near Westside Neighborhood Association. The association consists of 24 historic homes – all built in 1930 or earlier – that border a UM parking lot off of Krause Street, known as Lot W11, between West Washington and West Liberty. [.jpg of map showing location of the NWNA and the lot] The neighborhood group was recently formed in response to construction at the lot, which has caused issues related to noise, lighting and stormwater runoff, among other things.

Chip Smith spoke to regents about problems in a UM parking lot off of Krause Street affecting neighboring homes. He represents the recently formed Near Westside Neighborhood Association.

Smith thanked Jim Kosteva – UM’s community  relations director – for his help, and provided a handout to regents that included a Nov. 23 letter that the association had sent Kosteva about Lot W11 issues.

A packet of materials distributed to regents by Smith listed several issues related to the parking lot, including the impact of construction activities, traffic, vandalism, and a lack of communication with neighbors. One of the handouts stated that “UM Lot W11 has been a bad neighbor for 20+ years.”

During his remarks, Smith focused on two main concerns: (1) implementing best management practices for stormwater control, and (2) lighting at the lot, which is outdated and intrusive for surrounding homes.

He praised UM’s sustainability initiative, and asked regents and the administration to hold the project group’s feet to the fire in terms of implementing stormwater best management practices that the university has adopted. [Among the sustainability goals outlined by Coleman in September was this one related to stormwater: "Protect the Huron River through best-in-class stormwater control strategies and by applying 40 percent fewer chemicals to campus landscapes, and ensure that at least 30 percent of stormwater runoff does not flow into the Huron River."]

Referring to construction on the lot that’s planned in 2012, Smith said the main issue is lighting. It’s unclear whether the current lights – which Smith said are extremely bright – will be replaced, but he asked that UM staff work with representatives of the neighborhood to find an acceptable solution.

In addition to these specific issues, the problem is the way in which the residents are treated, Smith said. Of the 24 houses surrounding the lot, 21 are owner-occupied. “This is our neighborhood,” he said, adding that he looked forward to working with UM to minimize the impact of future construction. He thanked regents for the opportunity to address the board.

After Smith’s remarks, regent Larry Deitch called the presentation “refreshing” – presumably because the tone had not been combative, as is often the case with remarks made during public commentary. Regent Andrea Fischer Newman said it would be helpful if Smith could bring a map. [A map of the lot, as well as photos of that location and other UM parking lots, were part of a packet of materials distributed to regents at the start of Smith's remarks.]

Present: Mary Sue Coleman (ex officio), Julia Darlow, Larry Deitch, Denise Ilitch, Olivia (Libby) Maynard, Andrea Fischer Newman, Andy Richner, Kathy White.

Absent: Martin Taylor.

Next board meeting: Thursday, Jan. 19, 2012 at 3 p.m. at the Fleming administration building on UM’s central campus. [confirm date]

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the University of Michigan board of regents. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

A Santa sock worn by regent Libby Maynard at the final board meeting of 2011 was a subtle reflection of the holiday season.

Students from the Amazin’ Blue a cappella group sang Christmas carols at the Dec. 15 regents meeting.

Board chair Denise Ilitch wore a UM Santa’s hat during the performance by Amazin’ Blue. The front of the hat was embroidered with “Michigan.”

Black Action Movement protesters on the University of Michigan campus in 1970. (Photo courtesy of Jay Cassidy.)

Except that if you could somehow step back in time exactly four decades you would be greeted by a very different sight: students shouting, marching, and picketing; classes disrupted, canceled, or being held in nearby churches; angry voices calling for the deployment of the National Guard; a campus and community pushed almost to the breaking point. If the events of the Black Action Movement strike of 40 years ago had unfolded only a little differently, today people might speak of “Michigan” rather than “Kent State” as marking the tragic and deadly end of the sixties.

Instead, the BAM strike became one of the few protests of that era in which the students could make a valid claim of victory.

As it turned out, each side would have reason to believe that it had bested the other. The students because the university had been forced to negotiate and had ultimately acceded to the most important of their demands; the university administration because they claimed to be merely going forward with the plan they had proposed at the outset, rather than succumbing to student pressure.

That the protest came to a peaceful conclusion was due most probably to the restraint exhibited by university president Robben Fleming, and perhaps moreover Gov. William Milliken, who unlike other state leaders of that time (primarily Ronald Reagan in California) was not inclined to ruthlessly crush student rebellions; as well as the BAM leadership, who despite their often inflammatory rhetoric were determined to keep the strike non-violent.

The programs instituted as a result of the BAM strike of 1970 represented the first major breakthrough in a decades-long struggle to end discrimination at the University of Michigan. Up until the 1960s there were few black students or faculty at the university. In 1962 a federal investigation concluded that there was considerable racial bias in hiring at UM and urged that steps be taken to increase integration at every level. A committee set up by President Harlan Hatcher recommended that a special program be established to provide additional recruiting of minority students as well as financial aid and support services. The Opportunity Awards Program was started in 1964 and by 1969 black enrollment had increased from 2% to a little over 3%.

To many, however, this modest increase hardly seemed to make a difference. Elise Bryant was a freshman at the university in the fall of 1969. Coming from a mostly black neighborhood in Detroit, she was struck by the scarcity of African-Americans on campus. “You wouldn’t see any black people on the street,” she recalls, “and it became this custom that if you saw a black person on the street you would say, ‘What’s happening?’ And I remember when I would leave Ann Arbor and go to New York for a visit, or go back to Detroit, I’d start talking to every black person on the street, and it wasn’t the same. Sometimes there were weird reactions. People were like, ‘What are you talking to me for?’”

Once accepted at the university, black students continued to face prejudice and discrimination that was deeply entrenched in campus life. “It was that Northern brand of racism that was more subtle, that wasn’t blatant” explains Bryant. “I mean, all my friends were getting jobs as waitresses, and I applied to every restaurant on campus as a waitress and couldn’t get hired.”

Cynthia Stephens, a bright young African-American student who came to Ann Arbor in the fall of 1968 at age 16, remembers being told by her adviser to take a reduced course load. “I’m sitting there staring at her in amazement. I wasn’t Suma Cum Laude from Cass, but I had a 1300 SAT score, which qualified me in those days to make my own schedule without going to a counselor. And I was just like, ‘Are you looking at my record, or looking at me?’”

In the spring of 1968, following the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., a group of black students locked themselves into the UM administration building to protest the lack of support for minorities at the university. In response, the administration agreed to establish a Martin Luther King scholarship fund and appoint a few additional black administrators. Over the next year President Fleming (who replaced the retiring Harlan Hatcher) held discussions with black students that resulted in the establishment of a Black Studies curriculum and the opening of the Center for Afro-American Studies in the fall of 1969.

A Black Action Movement protest outside the Frieze Building in 1970. (Photo courtesy of Jay Cassidy.)

But for many, the integration of the university was simply not moving fast enough. In late 1969 representatives of most of the black student groups on campus came together and decided that a more proactive approach would be required in order to speed the process. The following January a series of talks were held between black students and university administrators regarding the matter of black enrollment, and a number of the students were invited to dine with President Fleming and further discuss the issues.

When the students arrived at the president’s house on the evening of Feb. 5, however, it wasn’t to have dinner but rather to hold a demonstration on the front lawn in which they presented Fleming with a list of demands. Chief among these was an increase in black enrollment to 10% – the percentage of the state population that was African-American – by the fall of 1973. Other demands included the hiring of additional recruiters for black students, the hiring of additional black faculty, the institution of new support services for black students, the establishment of a Black Student Center, the expansion of the MLK scholarship fund, tuition wavers for disadvantaged students, and a significant increase in the almost non-existent Hispanic student population.

“We do not expect the university to procrastinate and sub-committee these demands,” the statement concluded. “They are for immediate and positive action.” It was signed by “the United Black Population at the University of Michigan,” a coalition of a half dozen or so black groups from the various colleges and departments of the university. Soon they would adopt the much catchier moniker of the Black Action Movement, and bring the university as close to calamity as it would ever be during the entire period of student protest.

University of Michigan President Robben Fleming at a news conference during the 1970 Black Action Movement strike. (Photo courtesy of Jay Cassidy.)

The atmosphere was tense at the regents’ meeting on Feb. 19, when representatives of BAM appeared to present their demands in person. Although tempers occasionally flared, most of the regents expressed sympathy with BAM’s position. They refused to respond directly to the demands, however, and asked President Fleming to prepare an alternative proposal for their next public meeting in March. BAM stormed out of the room and a group of about 25 black students went to the Undergraduate Library and took hundreds of books off the shelves, forcing the building to close while the books were replaced.

The next morning BAM members gathered at the university’s administration building to again demand immediate action. When President Fleming and the regents once more refused, a larger contingent of black students went back to the library and disarranged thousands more books. Fleming responded by stationing Ann Arbor police officers at major university libraries.

In the coming weeks there were further disruptions, such as the interruption of classes to discuss the BAM demands, and the blockading of the Michigan Union snack bar. These actions were upsetting to many, but even so support for the BAM position was growing across campus.

Early in March President Fleming made a public announcement of his alternative proposal. It established 10% black enrollment as a “goal” rather than a commitment, and promised that the university would work toward achieving a number of the other BAM dictates, but only if additional funding could be found. Fleming contended in his 1996 memoir, “Tempests into Rainbows,” that it was primarily lack of funding that prevented the university from granting the BAM demands.

The regents held an open meeting on March 18 to discuss Fleming’s plan. Almost 500 people attended. An exhausting and at times heated debate – in which BAM referred to the administration’s proposal as a “nebulous, weasel-worded proposition” – ended without agreement. The BAM leaders called for a demonstration in nearby Regents Plaza the next day.

Protesters in 1970 marching across the University of Michigan Regents Plaza. (Photo courtesy of Jay Cassidy.)

On March 19, 1970, while inside the administration building the regents voted their approval of Fleming’s plan, outside was an angry rally in which the BAM leadership announced that the university’s black students were on strike and intended to close down the campus until their demands were met. Police were summoned and the gathering became a melee, with scuffles breaking out between law officers and demonstrators. Four students were arrested. Charges of racism were made against the Ann Arbor police because although a good proportion of the demonstrators were white, all of the arrestees were black.

The presence of significant numbers of white students at the March 19 demonstration underscores an important aspect of the BAM strike: the support it was given by the traditionally non-black activist groups on campus, such as Students for a Democratic Society. The participation of white students was crucial to the effectiveness of the strike, if for no other reason than there simply were not enough African-Americans on campus to be able to make a significant impact on the normal operations of the university.

On March 20 a group of about 200 picketers marched outside Hill Auditorium during the university’s Honors Convocation, at which President Robben Fleming was speaking. A party of white protesters entered the concert hall and marched up and down the aisles, fists raised in a Black Power salute, chanting “Open it up or shut it down.” BAM leaders were angry that the disruption of the ceremony had been undertaken without their approval. Through the Michigan Daily, the university’s student newspaper, BAM told its supporters: “If we don’t say do something, don’t you do it.”

Protesters at Hill Auditorium during a University of Michigan Honors Convocation. (Photo courtesy of Jay Cassidy.)

Not everyone in BAM was in favor of accepting help from white activists. But it was eventually agreed that the non-black groups would be welcome as long as they remained in a subordinate role. Cynthia Stephens, who had become a leading figure in BAM – “I was the vice president, because in those days that was what women were” – recalls that many were worried that the white radicals, who were more experienced in managing protests, might try to take over. “In order for the strike to have been successful, whether we perceived it or not, we needed their support,” says Stephens. “But it needed to be support.”

Madison Foster, who was a junior faculty member and one of the leaders of the BAM negotiating team, thinks that to focus on the ethnicity of the strikers is to cloud the most important aspect of the protest. “It wasn’t just a black strike, or a white strike,” he says. “It was a student strike.”

By the following Monday, March 23, the moratorium was having a clear impact – to the surprise of almost everyone, including BAM itself. Picketers marched outside the main classroom buildings and class attendance was noticeably down. A number of professors and teaching fellows joined the strike and canceled their classes, while others held their classes off campus to show support.

The university presented a front of indifference. The Michigan Daily quoted one regent as saying, “The students can strike until hell freezes over as far as I am concerned.” President Fleming added, “As long as classes are being held, we don’t have to care whether people are going or not.”

Picketers block access to a university parking structure during the 1970 Black Action Movement strike. (Photo courtesy of Jay Cassidy.)

This outlook would change as the week wore on and the strike gathered momentum. Class attendance continued to drop. The School of Social Work, the Residential College, and the Institute for Social Research closed down. BAM and its supporters instigated additional disruptions, interrupting classes to talk about the issue of the strike, marching through hallways banging on trash cans, picketing in front of parking garages, and blocking traffic (someone “lost” a contact lens in the middle of State Street by the Michigan Union and a group of strikers spent an hour on their knees looking for it).

By Wednesday, attendance at the College of Literature, Science and the Arts (LSA) was down an estimated 60%. More and more faculty were coming out in favor of the BAM position, and President Fleming offered to meet with black leaders at the bargaining table. BAM was feeling its power, however, and was not so inclined to make a quick settlement. By Thursday, LSA attendance was down an estimated 75% and the college was considering shutting its doors.

Then on Friday came what may have been the most crucial development, when the American Federation of State and County Municipal Employees announced its support of the strike. University employees who were AFSCME members refused to cross the student picket lines and campus food service came to a grinding halt. “The men and women of AFSCME were incredible,” remembers Cynthia Stephens, now a judge on the Michigan Court of Appeals. “It’s what made me initially decide I really, really, really wanted to be a labor lawyer.”

Elise Bryant concurs. “In my mind it was the union that made us strong. Because I think the administration would’ve let us spin our wheels until the end of the semester, then wait for the next crop of students to come in. Which is what they figured out after that – give them what they want and then they’ll be gone.”

Toward the end of the week the strike increased in intensity, with the disruptions taking on a more physical nature. Windows were being broken and other university property damaged. Some faculty and students were feeling threatened. But neither BAM nor President Fleming wanted violence, and both made great efforts to keep the situation under control.

Black Action Movement protesters on the University of Michigan campus in 1970. (Photo courtesy of Jay Cassidy.)

“We used conflict,” explains Madison Foster, “but we kept some of the hotheads from doing violent things, both black and white. We had to tighten up some people so they understood that there were consequences, if they were talking about blowing up something or doing something destructive, because we would end up being the ones that would be hurt.”

President Fleming was also under increasing pressure to bring the strike to an end, by force if necessary. “I credit Fleming for not escalating the conflict by calling in troopers, or by escalating his rhetoric,” Foster says. “In that sense he handled the situation well.”

But what is not generally known is that at an early point in the negotiations, Fleming – whose reputation as a leader at both the University of Wisconsin and UM rests to a large extent on his disinclination to use force to end student disruptions – threatened to bring in the military. “To me that was a very critical point,” says Foster. “Early on, after maybe the third session, he said flatly that if we didn’t abandon the buildings and do the things he wanted, he was going to call the National Guard. I was telling a friend that I probably made one of the boldest comments of my life, in hindsight. I said, ‘Well, I guess we’ll die,’ and we walked out. I wasn’t going to negotiate under threat.”

Foster’s recollections take on added significance when one considers that a little over a month following the resolution of the BAM strike, 13 student protesters were shot and four killed by National Guardsmen at Kent State University in Ohio, less than a day’s drive from Ann Arbor. Tensions were running high on the Michigan campus, and all across the country that spring. If the military had been called out to end the BAM strike, the results could have been tragic. Thankfully, they were not.

“We didn’t realize that people would really ever shoot at students,” says Cynthia Stephens. “It wasn’t real to us. If we had tried to start the BAM strike after Kent State, I don’t know if it would’ve happened. I also sort of wondered whether – and I don’t know this at all, because I didn’t know folk at Kent State – I wondered whether the measured response by the University of Michigan gave encouragement to the students at Kent State to believe that what happened there wouldn’t happen.”

Negotiations continued over the weekend but on Monday, March 30, the strike began to lose momentum. Class attendance was on the rise and food service had resumed. Some may have believed the strike to be over after the university announced on Sunday that agreement had been reached on nearly all points, despite an informal arrangement between BAM and the president that neither side would make public statements until the negotiations were completed. (Fleming claimed that the press release was a mistake, but it could also have been a canny political maneuver.)

Money had been found in the various colleges and departments of the university to support the desired increase in black enrollment, as well as many of BAM’s other demands. The only major point of disagreement remaining was whether 10% enrollment should be a “commitment” or a “goal.” The BAM leadership decided that it was time to settle.

“I think we reached a point where we believed we had gotten what we could get,” explains Cynthia Stephens. “We had achieved maximum victory from that event, and this wasn’t a winner-take-all contest.” Also, the students were becoming restless, she says. “It was getting to the end of the semester. They needed to graduate and finish classes.”

“And ultimately, how long we could keep external forces away” – i.e., the National Guard – “was also an issue.”

On April 1, 1970, it was announced that a settlement had been reached and the strike was over. The university pledged several million dollars toward the “goal” of reaching 10% black enrollment by the 1973-74 term. Programs would be established to recruit black students and faculty, aid and support services would be put in place for minority students, and the Center for Afro-American Studies would receive increased funding. However, there would be no Black Student Center, no tuition wavers, nor any additional funding for the MLK scholarship. Also refused was amnesty for students who would otherwise be disciplined for their actions during the strike.

BAM leaders staged a victory celebration that same evening. In an oral history interview given in 1978, Fred Miller of Students for a Democratic Society recalled the scene in the Michigan Union ballroom on April 1.

The night that they announced the settlement was one of the most incredible political events I’ve ever been at. They had a jazz band. The place was packed and the music sort of builds up to this peak, and in comes the negotiating team. Each member of the negotiating team gave a short speech. They had it really well orchestrated, and they were rousing speeches. The event created a real feeling that the struggle had been essentially won, and it left everyone feeling satisfied.

At the same time, the university administration was presenting the settlement as being in their favor, in that the final agreement seemed little different than the plan they had originally wanted to implement. “To assist a new generation of able, energetic black men and women to move into positions of responsibility and leadership will be an aspiration worthy of our greatest efforts,” said the regents in their official statement. Perhaps both sides’ claims of victory are equally valid.

The struggle to improve conditions for minorities at the university was far from over, however. The goal of 10% enrollment was never achieved. The UM black student population peaked at just under 8% in 1976, then began to decline. (Today it stands at 2,204 out of 41,674, or a little over 5%.) In addition, racial problems on campus caused the reawakening of BAM in the middle ’70s – BAM II – and late ’80s – BAM III.

“The lesson of the Black Action Movement is that we must keep our lamps trimmed and burning,” says Elise Bryant, who is now a professor at the National Labor College. “That the work doesn’t stop. There’s a song, ‘You’ve got to work for it, fight for it, day and night for it, pass it on, pass it on.’ And I think that’s the mistake my generation made, and I think I made, in terms of not reaching back and offering opportunities for the next generation, not giving them the history and the culture – because they’re not going to learn it any place else.”

“You have to leave the place better than you found it,” she says. “That’s what I was taught.”

Alan Glenn is working on a documentary film about Ann Arbor in the ’60s. Visit the film’s website for more information.

UM President Robben Fleming at a press conference during the Black Action Movement strike in March 1970. (Photo courtesy of Jay Cassidy.)

On March 12, 1968, Robben Wright Fleming was inaugurated as the ninth president of the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. It was a time of great turmoil on college campuses across the country, especially at Michigan, which was in the vanguard of the radical student movement. Fleming had been hired to replace the retiring Harlan Hatcher largely because of the reputation he had built for controlling student unrest while chancellor at the University of Wisconsin.

Fleming’s background was as a labor negotiator, and he preferred to engage students in reasoned discussion and debate rather than send in the riot squad. As he related in his autobiography, “Tempests into Rainbows,” after learning of his interest in taking the top post at Michigan, the regents of the university invited him to the Pontchartrain Hotel in Detroit, where for two hours they talked mainly about how he would deal with student disruptions.

Fleming explained to the regents that he “thought force must be avoided insofar as humanly possible, that indignities and insults could be endured if they averted violence, and that … these problems would last for some unspecified time, but that they would eventually end.” The next day he was offered the presidency.

Fleming assumed the helm in Ann Arbor in 1968 – the most turbulent year yet in an increasingly tempestuous and troubled decade. Over the next three years he would face an escalating series of crises that would severely test his negotiatory approach to student unrest. There were protests against classified war research and the ROTC. There was agitation for the creation of a student-run bookstore. There were three bombs exploded on or near campus. There were three nights of rioting on South University Avenue, a serial killer stalking campus co-eds, and perhaps the most challenging event of his term, the BAM strike of March 1970.

The Black Action Movement was a loose coalition of African-American students and faculty united in the common purpose of expanding the minority presence on campus. BAM called for a campus-wide strike until the university agreed to meet their demands – chief among which was a commitment to increase black enrollment from 3% to 10% over the next four years.

Demonstrators disrupt a ceremony at Hill Auditorium during the Black Action Movement strike of March 1970. President Robben Fleming stands at the podium. (Photo courtesy of Jay Cassidy.)

The BAM strike was led by black students and faculty, and remained so throughout its nearly two-week duration; but white radical groups quickly became involved in a supporting role, and before long the normal operations of the university were being significantly impaired. Negotiations were conducted per the president’s usual style, but as days passed and no agreement was reached, tensions on both sides began to mount. Fleming was under increasing pressure to end the strike by force.

Just as it seemed that the situation might boil over into violence, however, there was a breakthrough at the negotiating table. An agreement was struck, the strike was called off, and bloodshed was averted. Fleming’s handling of the BAM dispute is often counted as one of his finest moments.

In that regard it is interesting to note that praise for Fleming’s presidency at Michigan tends to consist not of positives but of negatives – what he did not do. He did not lose his temper when dealing with student radicals. He did not in general respond to disruptions with force, as others might have done, and as some encouraged him to do. He did not call out the National Guard. He did not escalate conflicts until someone was killed.

Of course Fleming did on occasion use force to resolve standoffs with students. But he seemed to have an earnest desire to avoid conflict whenever possible, and when resorting to force he planned the action so as to minimize violence – for example, working to ensure that demonstrators occupying a building had an opportunity to escape out the back way as the police moved in.

Fleming’s seemingly conciliatory approach – as well as his public statements against the war in Vietnam – tended to give the impression that he sympathized with the student protesters and their causes.

But the president himself was the first to say that he acted as he did not out of sympathy but because of his reasoned judgment that a more extreme response would ultimately be counter-productive. As chancellor at Madison, Fleming drew the national spotlight after using his own personal funds to post bail for 11 student demonstrators who had been arrested following their occupation of a university office. He later explained that he did this not out of compassion but rather to prevent the students from becoming martyrs to their cause.

After Fleming’s death on Jan. 11, 2010, at age 93, many eulogies appeared lauding his tolerant, enlightened leadership during what was probably the most calamitous period in the history of the University of Michigan. Almost without exception these were based on Fleming’s own view of events, as put forth in his memoir, and the recollections of his colleagues and friends in the administration.

Those who faced him from the other side of the fence sometimes remember Robben Fleming a bit differently. A number of former activists who had occasion to interact with the late president provided their thoughts and impressions via phone and e-mail.

Steve Nissen: Human Rights Party

I was very engaged in activism at the University of Michigan when Robben Fleming assumed the presidency in 1968. He came to the job with a reputation for adeptly handling the turbulent student protests while at the University of Wisconsin. I found him more approachable than his predecessors and willing to engage in discussions with student leaders, which distinguished him from the aloof attitudes of other university leaders.

He didn’t make huge changes, but his openness gained him some increased respect and cooperation from the more moderate student elements, which I was not. However, he was not popular with tough-minded student activists because we were all functioning in a highly polarized environment and there wasn’t much room for compromise.

In my case, we disagreed, but our relationship was not disagreeable. He was soft-spoken and never strident in relating to student leaders, but he did not yield much, either. Given the times, he was probably as good a choice as possible as a college president for a troubled era.

Bill Ayers: Students for a Democratic Society

I had an interesting relationship with Robben Fleming and it continued long, long after he was president of the University of Michigan. We reconnected after I became a professor at the University of Illinois. He was in Chicago doing some work with the MacArthur Foundation. We had coffee and that became something we did periodically.

He told me years later that one of the things that was difficult for him was not the heat that he was getting from the students, it was the heat from the trustees [regents]. The trustees looked to people like Clark Kerr [at the University of California] and thought that that was the smart way to go, to hammer these students. Fleming, I think largely because of his background as a negotiator and a labor professor and so on, was more inclined to negotiate. He wasn’t a kind of Neanderthal standing at the gate insisting he had the only view. He always wanted to know what you thought.

The night that I remember most vividly was the last day of March, 1968. Lyndon Johnson had gone on television and announced that he was not going to run for president, and he would work to end the war in Vietnam. And we poured out of our apartments and we had this kind of spontaneous rally that raced through the streets of Ann Arbor and ended up on the steps of his house there on South University.

I had a bullhorn and Fleming came out and he had a bullhorn and what he said that night I remember absolutely vividly. He said, “You’re to be congratulated. You’ve won a great victory. You’ve ended this war.” And I think he believed it that night. I know I believed it. A few months after that it was clear the war would not end, but would escalate. But on that night, March 31, 1968, in the middle of the night, standing outside his house with 1,500 students trampling the rose bushes, he was calm and he was clear and he was congratulatory and that’s the kind of guy he was.

I think he genuinely thought that the war was a mistake. I don’t think he had a critique or an analysis that was against imperialism like we did, but I think that he didn’t think that the war was a good thing. I think the evidence for him of why the war was not a good thing was that it was tearing up the country.

He wrote a memoir about those days and as I remember it, he said at one point that while he and I had differences, we were always fairly civil with each other. It struck me as funny when I read it because I was remembering that night of March 31, 1968, when I was basically shouting, “Fuck you, you motherfucker,” into a megaphone, and he remembers it as I was always reasonable. I don’t think I was always reasonable, but he was a pretty reasonable guy and I think he believed in the power of reason and the importance of evidence.

Madison Foster: Black Action Movement

I have respect for him, that’s the first thing I want to establish. Respect as a scholar, an intellectual, and after I negotiated for the Black Action Movement, I have respect for how he negotiated. And also how things came out, and how he followed up afterwards. When he did make promises when he negotiated, he delivered on them. So in that sense I have nothing but positives to say about Robben Fleming.

As a negotiator Fleming was good. At first he tried some divisive things, but that’s okay, that was the name of the game. It was leaked to the press that the strike was over, and many students heard the news and backed off, and we had to go back and regroup again. Fleming threatened us early on to call the National Guard, and I for one called his bluff by simply saying, “Well, I guess we’ll die,” and we walked out. I wasn’t going to negotiate under threat, so I called his bluff, and he didn’t bring in the National Guard. [This would have been about five weeks prior to the shootings at Kent State.]

From my understanding, one of the reasons Fleming was brought to Michigan was because of the general student conflict at Berkeley and other places, and the left radical organizing that had been going on at Michigan. They were expecting some conflict to come off from white students. They didn’t expect the conflict to be led by black minority students at the time.

I would say the BAM strike probably was one of the few successful, if not the only successful student strike of that period – in the sense that we got about 90% of the demands. But at the same time much of that was because of who Robben Fleming was.

Picketers in front of the University of Michigan's Hill Auditorium during the Black Action Movement strike of March 1970. (Photo courtesy of Jay Cassidy.)

I had the feeling that he was open to having more African-American students enrolled at the university, that he wasn’t opposed to it. I can’t say for sure. If I had to guess I would think he was personally sympathetic. But he was a true negotiator. Don’t forget that. He was all pro.

I would credit him with keeping the lid on generally – there weren’t any casualties at Michigan, in spite of the fact that Michigan was probably the second-most radical activist hotbed after Berkeley, during that period. During the BAM strike, I wouldn’t credit him for keeping the lid on, I would credit the BAM leadership. We used conflict, but we kept some of the hotheads from doing violent things, both black and white. But I credit Fleming for not escalating the conflict by calling in troopers, or by escalating his rhetoric. In that sense he handled the situation well.

I tried to get to him. I got to him a little bit, once. He got angry enough to get up from his chair. We tried to keep him off balance, but he was basically calm. That’s what I mean when I say he was a good negotiator – he was calculating, and he was basically very calm.

Overall, I’d have to say positive things about Fleming. That might not be what some people want to hear me say, but that’s what I would say. I would say it if he were alive, to him. In fact, I did say it to him.

Eric Chester: Students for a Democratic Society

My experiences with Fleming were generally not positive. I found him to be a rigid personality, unwilling and unable to engage in a genuine give and take. Of course, I completely disagreed with his political perspective, but, even given this, I found other university administrators to be more likeable personalities.

During the book store sit-in [of September 1969], I was sent by the sit-in contingent to speak to Fleming. He said he would not negotiate on the issue of a university-run bookstore until we evacuated the building. There was therefore nothing to talk about and I soon left to report back to the sit-in group that Fleming was unwilling to negotiate. We were then arrested, and at a meeting of the regents shortly afterward the administration caved in and created the bookstore. Pointless macho behavior by Fleming, but then I suppose that’s why they hired him in the first place.

I did not find Fleming to be courteous. I met him rarely in an informal, personal context since he made little effort to meet with student activists. When I did meet him, I found him to be a cold, calculating technocrat. I did not like him and I did not find him to be particularly competent in dealing with the issues we raised.

SDS activists were radicals and socialists. We saw ourselves as part of a larger movement for fundamental social change. Fleming was just a cog in the corporate hierarchy. It is difficult to see how we could have had two more different world views. Even on Vietnam, SDS called for immediate withdrawal from the start. Fleming was one of many corporate liberals who began to think it had been a mistake well after it began and were looking for a graceful way out.

Rennie Davis: Chicago Seven Defendant

Robben was a friend of my family. He knew my father, who was an economics professor at Michigan State. We spoke together at Hill Auditorium [in 1969] at a time when I was the “popular” speaker to the student anti-war audience and he came in to speak, did well, but it took a little courage on his part.

A rare president leading a great university from the courage of wisdom is my memory of Robben Fleming. In a time of student passion to change the world, I marveled at his ability to hold and honor the center when side-taking was all the rage. His spirit to see humanity in any side is a legacy that will inspire us always.

James Swan: Environmental Action for Survival

I recall being called to Fleming’s home on the day after the Kent State shootings. President Fleming quickly assembled a group of faculty and students who had been active on campus political events, and he sought their advice and support to prevent something like that from happening on campus. He was genuinely concerned about what had happened, and determined to avert something like that in Ann Arbor. The meeting was a very honest discussion with all people’s perspectives welcomed.

I always found Fleming to be an honest, sincere person who tried to lend a sense of dignity and open-mindedness to his position, as well as the university.

Gary Rothberger: Students for a Democratic Society

Robben Fleming was one of the first of a new type of university president, one hired not for the ability to charm alumni and faculty but rather one who could do crisis management. Whatever he believed personally, as president he acted to stop real change in the university while conveying an image of corporate liberalism. He was fairly good at seeming to want to resolve the issue, if not for the extremists and their unrealistic demands.

To deal with Fleming was to realize that he was a cold dude who didn’t care about anything else other than carrying out his assignment. He clearly disliked SDS, our ilk and our desire for democratizing society. And he clearly was determined to smash the student movement.

Robben Fleming during the June 1969 violent conflicts on South University in Ann Arbor. (Photo courtesy of Jay Cassidy.)

A particular example of both his ruthlessness and willingness to act as the hammer for cooperate liberalism occurred around 1970 or ’71 when one of the first UM lesbian organizations attempted to have a conference on campus. Fleming issued moralistic statements and refused to allow the conference to go on and refused to discuss the issue.

His false and much, much too belated public semi-opposition to the war not withstanding, I have no idea what his own personal views were on anything except that, eventually, you are what you do.

[On the second night of mayhem on South University in June 1969] two or three of us went to the presidential house. He came to the door and we told him that the police were creating a riot and were clubbing people and gassing them for no reason. He said that he did not see any “inappropriate” police behavior and that the cops wouldn’t gas people. I then tossed a gas canister into the foyer and asked whether he thought that was inappropriate. He sputtered and mouthed a few inanities and went back into the house.

A little while later he came out and made some sort on innocuous statement that meant nothing and he certainly was unwilling to call out the police for brutality. I had been in Mississippi, and in Detroit during some of the riots there. I know what extreme police brutality is and I’m not claiming that this was at the same level as some of that stuff. However, they were gassing people and clubbing people, doing it randomly and were obviously enjoying it. Fleming knew it, probably didn’t like it, but clearly was willing to ignore it because he thought to criticize it would have been politically unwise.

You are what you do. He did nothing when he could have spoken out.

Paul Soglin: Students for a Democratic Society (University of Wisconsin)

His greatest strength was his belief in himself and that rational discourse would carry the day. His weakness was accepting the Cold War rationalization that the state must prevail over independent thinking. He should have trusted his own beliefs and instincts.

Jim Toy: Ann Arbor Gay Liberation Front

We started the Ann Arbor Gay Liberation Front in the spring of 1970. Soon thereafter we got a message from the regents: “Will you please come to a regents’ meeting and tell the regents what Gay Liberation wants.” That day there must’ve been an overflow, because when I got there every seat was filled. So I said, “The regents have asked Gay Liberation to tell them what Gay Liberation wants, and I’m Jim Toy and I’m here to do that. Where should I sit?”

President Fleming, at the far end of the table, graciously stood up and said, “Mr. Toy, please have my chair.” So for the first and I would guess the last time in my life, I sat in the president’s chair at a regents’ meeting.

I told the regents what we wanted. Justice, in the sense of, for example, counselors trained to help people with concerns about sexual orientation. Changes in the curriculum. Changes to the university’s non-discrimination policy. And so on. And then they said thank you very much, and off I went. It would take more than twenty years before the regents would add sexual orientation to their non-discrimination policy.

In 1970 Gay Liberation Front requested university space in which to have a statewide conference. We received a formal letter from President Fleming denying use of space. There was a picket outside the president’s house, as I recall, protesting the denial. But a vice president of the Student Government Council said, “That’s okay, I have the keys to the Student Activities Building.” And so we had the conference.

I remember a friend of mine in Gay Liberation went to the Diag and burned a Bible. And President Fleming happened to be walking by, and said, at least by report, “I wouldn’t do that if I were you.” That was the extent of it.

If he got riled, he continued to be polite. And some people have been reported to say that this was one of his great strengths.

The author would like to thank all those who contributed to the writing of this story, directly and indirectly, with special thanks to Will Hathaway for providing a copy of his invaluable dissertation, “Conflict Management and Leadership in Higher Education: A Case Study of University of Michigan President Robben W. Fleming.”

Alan Glenn is working on a documentary film about Ann Arbor in the ’60s. Visit the film’s website for more information.

Robben Fleming at the groundbreaking for the University of Michigan Power Center in April 1969. (Photo courtesy of Jay Cassidy.)

Iranian students protest on the Diag. On the right is Eugene Dariush Daneshvar.

The Chronicle first met Eugene Dariush Daneshvar in the context of “home” – he attended a Wall Street neighborhood meeting we covered in December 2008, where he was concerned about how his home in the Riverside Park Place condominiums would be affected by a University of Michigan building project.

On Tuesday evening we encountered him again, also in the context of home – this time, he was on the Diag with about 100 other Iranian students and faculty, protesting voter fraud in recently held elections in their homeland.

We’d been alerted to the protest by another Iranian student, who told us that students were planning a peaceful demonstration to protest election fraud. The protest was in support of the hundreds of thousands of people in Iran who’ve rallied since election results were released on Saturday that declared President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad the winner. Ahmadinejad had run against a popular reform candidate, Mir Hossein Mousavi, who called the election an “astonishing charade,” according to the Associated Press.

Marchers on the Diag protest voter fraud in the recent Iranian presidential election.

Organizers of the Diag gathering hoped to raise Americans’ awareness about the situation. Many protesters dressed in somber colors and wore green crepe paper ribbons tied around their wrists or arms – green was the color of Mousavi’s campaign. Most carried signs that read “In Solidarity with the People of Iran” and “Where Is My Vote?”

A few signs showed photographs of Iranian police beating demonstrators during recent rallies in Tehran, the nation’s capital. Others passed out green flyers to passers-by that explained their concerns, including the fact that at least eight people have been killed and others injured by the country’s Revolutionary Guard and supporters of Ahmadinejad.

Daneshvar, a doctoral student in UM’s department of biomedical engineering, was born in the U.S. but told us that about half his family lives in Iran, which he visited a few months ago. Communication has been difficult, in part because so many people are trying to reach their friends and relatives that the country’s telecommunications system is overloaded, and in part because of Iranian government security measures.

This is the first major uprising since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, which brought hard-liners into power, and Daneshvar said it’s exciting that there’s potential for change. But mainly, people are frustrated, he said – if the country is going to be ruled by a dictatorship, then just say it. Don’t hold a fake election just to placate the population: “Why bother?” he said.

Tuesday’s protest brought out UM students, but Iranians attending MSU, Wayne State University and the University of Toledo also took part. Organizers said a similar event might take place on Thursday in Lansing.

Meanwhile, Daneshvar was planning to turn his attention later Tuesday evening to his other home – councilmember Sabra Briere (Ward 1) was to meet with the Riverside Park Place board, of which he is a member, to update them on the Wall Street project.