The Faculty Senate voted in support of adopting a “welcoming campus” status at a special meeting on the topic. During which faculty and students alike discussed the potential merits and drawbacks of adopting the welcoming campus status at the University.

Christina Guenther, an associate professor of German, presented the resolution, which was passed today by Faculty Senate with a vote of 46–6–1.

The resolution doesn’t carry the “sanctuary campus” title as discussed in previous University dialogue, but offers similar protections to the original sanctuary campus petition created in November.

“The mission statement of BGSU pledges the creation of a welcoming, safe and diverse environment for all members of our academic community,” Guenther read from the resolution. “We, the Faculty Senate of Bowling Green State University, support the designation of BGSU as a welcoming campus for all groups targeted by these discriminatory policies.”

The resolution urges the University to undertake similar measures in practice at institutions including, but not limited to, the University of Michigan, Michigan State University and University of California, Los Angeles.

These institutions have made, in reaction to the immigration actions of President Donald Trump’s administration, efforts to protect immigrant-student information and have created policies for campus police to “not engage in helping the federal government with deportations” unless a specific federal warrant is presented.   

Resolutions passed by the Faculty Senate do not create new polices; the Board of Trustees ultimately enacts new polices with input from President Mazey.

“What goes to the Board is recommended by the president,” Mazey said after the meeting.

Mazey will have to have a number of people look at and evaluate the resolution, including campus police and the University’s lawyer.

“We will do a thorough examination of the resolution and then discuss it, obviously, with the Board of Trustees,” Mazey said.

The resolution directly addresses Trump’s Jan. 27 executive order limiting immigration into the country from seven select countries. During the meeting, the resolution was amended to also address any future orders limiting immigration in a similar fashion to the Jan. 27 order.

Two other amendments to the originally proposed resolution discussed were: the addition of the phrase “unless compelled by a federal warrant” regarding BGSU Police’s participation in deportations, and an amendment that eliminated a clause favoring the requirement that officials from homeland security, while on campus for the purpose of recruitment, wear civilian clothes, drive non-government cars and carry no weapons.

Derek Mason, a professor in the college of health and human services, voiced concern raised by a criminal justice professor about not allowing recruiting federal employees, such as those with homeland security, to be in uniform. According to Mason, recruiters cannot come onto campus to recruit without wearing uniforms.

“We may be hurting some of our students, and there could be a number of criminal justice students who do want to work for these federal agencies,” Mason said. “They may not have the opportunity to interview.”

Mason’s and others’ concerns were reflected in the above amendments, introduced by Allen Rogel of the physics and astronomy department. His amendments came after an initial vote to pass the resolution failed.

[[inline_image_identifier a3fbefea81d974251772d29a999315a9.jpg]]

Other presenters at the meeting included Valeria Grinberg, associate professor of romance and classical studies; Kristie Foell, associate professor of German; and Dan McInnis, an instructor in the school of art.

Grinberg, an immigrant herself, spoke on the topic of “Inclusion and Diversity in Practice.” She expressed concern for the possible loss of DACA protection for some students if the law were to be repealed, and spoke in favor of the BRIDGE Act, which Mazey has overtly supported.

“Despite, at this moment not being at risk personally … I am affected when someone in my community is affected,” Grinberg said.

Foell, during her presentation, stressed the lack of clear evidence and logic behind the Jan. 27 executive order.

“I think it’s important for us to take a stand on these [travel bans]… because they are not based on factual evidence,” Foell said. “There is essentially no correlation between immigrants and violent crime.”

McInnis localized the issue of refugee immigration with a few personal stories of Syrian refugee families currently living in the Toledo area.

Other faculty and student concerns during the meeting included understanding the difference between a sanctuary campus, as prevalent in previous University dialogue, and a welcoming campus.

Grinberg identified the possibility of a loss of funding if a campus were to self-identify as a sanctuary campus since the Trump administration has ordered a cut in funding for sanctuary cities, such as Los Angeles. She also shared a potential to partner with Not In Our Town under the term “welcoming.”

“We chose the name welcome campus because we wanted to join forces with Not In Our Town and … the city of Bowling Green is currently working with Not In Our Town … to establish Bowling Green as a welcome town,” Grinberg said.

She said the term “welcoming town” is less loaded than “sanctuary town,” and that it more clearly focuses on inclusion.

Faculty Senate Secretary Robyn Miller raised the issue that the resolution overtly opposes hate speech targeted only at certain students.

“I don’t think we should allow hate speech directed at anyone,” Miller said.

Student Hannah Modene responded.

“It’s very important for students here to see this,” she said. “To not be reaffirmed by the people who are supposed to support them, I think that is a very dangerous route to go down.”

Senator James Evans of the geology department, before motioning to vote on the resolution, noted the Faculty Senate was not actually creating any policy. Rather, a vote in support of the resolution was a show of sentiment.

“We’re not writing a law, we’re not writing a policy manual. We are not in any danger of interfering with federal officers — they’re not going to pay any attention to a Faculty Senate resolution,” Evans said. “This is a statement of our sentiments.”