Three of My Sources for This Semester

The following people will be some of my sources for my political beat during this semester. I am grateful for their advice and contributions.

Dorothy Kidd is a Media Studies professor at USF and the faculty adviser of the radio station KUSF.org. She is widely regarded for her work in community radio and and for working for social change through community media. She graduated from Simon Fraser University.

Bernadette Barker-Plummer is a professor at USF as well. She has contributed extensive work in the fields of Critical Studies in Media Communication and Feminist Media Studies. She teaches many courses at USF including a senior seminar titled "Gender and the Media."

Pat Steacy is the Audio/Visual Production Manager at USF. He has worked at the university since 1974 under the umbrella of 'Media Production' for the Athletics Department. Pat has held a deep passion for volleyball for a vast majority of his life.

Sources Talk About Ray Rice Controversy

I have talked to some of my sources for my political beat about the recent Ray Rice controversy. I did not learn any new insights from this though. One source does not care at all about professional sports, and another source stated that run-ins with the law by professional athletes is just not surprising anymore. With the recent ongoing stories about Rice, Adrian Peterson, and Jonathan Dwyer among others being publicized in the media recently, it is hard to blame the second source for not being startled by negative actions by professional athletes these days even if they are associated with treating women badly.

25 Years after Loma Prieta, USF Hopes to Dodge Another Bullet

            Standing on Irving and Funston streets near St. Anne’s School in the Inner Sunset District on October 17, 1989, after having watched his daughter’s volleyball practice conclude, USF Audio Visual Production Manager Pat Steacy was waiting for the bus when suddenly he heard an incredibly loud, rumbling noise.

            “Man, the N Judah sounds awfully loud today,” Steacy thought to himself.

            Little did he realize though that the bus wasn’t going to be coming anytime soon. Just a couple of seconds later, the famous Loma Prieta Earthquake began. Steacy remembered how the cars and buildings around him started to wave violently back and forth for approximately 15 seconds. All he could do was wait for the extreme trembling to cease, and then he immediately found his daughter and wife. Thankfully, there were no major casualties reported from St. Anne’s after the earthquake. Steacy even likened the experience to a thrilling Disneyland ride.

            “It was definitely an E Ticket ride,” Steacy remembered with laughter about the event. An E ticket ride is a ride at any amusement park that is known for its great intensity. However, the Inner Sunset District was not nearly the most affected area in the Bay Area to be impacted by the quake.

            According to the website of the United States Geological Survey, a national agency that is dedicated to providing reliable information about the Earth’s landscape and how to cope with natural hazards, the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake was a 6.9 magnitude quake that originated in the Santa Cruz Mountains and was very close to the Loma Prieta Mountains in Morgan Hill, California. The quake reportedly killed 63 people, injured 3,757 others, and caused approximately $6 billion in property damage all over the state. The most extreme examples of the impact of the earthquake were the complete collapsing of the Cypress Street Viaduct of Intersection 880 in Oakland, the disruption of Game 3 of the World Series at Candlestick Park, and the collapsing of the upper deck of the Bay Bridge.

            The quake obviously created lots of problems for citizens living near and in the Bay Area, but according to Steacy who has worked for USF since 1974, the University of San Francisco at the time suffered only minor damages. Some walls were cracked, and numerous books fell off of shelves in the Gleeson Library, but there were no major casualties reported as a result of the quake. USF did close the St. Ignatius Church for a short while, but that would be the crux of the impact of the Loma Prieta Earthquake on USF.

“The buildings were pretty much unaffected,” Steacy noted. “There were some cracks, but there wasn’t any major damage. It actually seemed to be a good situation.”

However, while USF seemed to be able to breathe a sigh of relief in 1989, the university today still has worked hard to prepare itself for the next massive earthquake. According to Eric Giardini of Disaster Preparedness of the Public Safety Department, USF has taken numerous precautions in preparation for another earthquake that could be similar or worse than Loma Prieta.

First, Giardini revealed that USF has an “All Hazards Plan.” This plan would involve members of the highest levels of administration at USF all coming together to brainstorm on how to address the potential disaster. For example, Fr. Fitzgerald would head a group of faculty and administration members and come up with a plan on where to send students if they needed to evacuate the school, and they would work immediately towards setting up online classes for students in case USF was forced to shut down. However, Giardini disclosed that USF would do all it could to avoid shutting down.

“It’s our goal not to shut down,” Giardini stated. “We would look into the possibility of online classes depending on if the power is available. Ultimately, we want to stay open because it’s important for the students to maintain their education and for the University to not suffer financially.”

For now, Giardini and the rest of the Public Safety Department at USF have posted lots of information online on what to do before, during, and after a potentially large earthquake. Also, the Public Safety Department has stressed that every student should have what they call a “Personal Preparedness Kit.” This kit would simply be a conglomeration of resources such as food, water, comfortable shoes, and other things, and students should have enough of those items to last at least 72 hours on their own. That way, students can be self-sufficient for a small period of time, and they wouldn’t have to depend on USF while the university tries to recover during the aftermath of a quake.

If worse comes to worse, students could actually be sent to another Jesuit school in the nation to continue their studies too. The other school would have to be a member of the Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities which is a group of Jesuit schools that work together through programs and the utilization of resources to improve Jesuit learning. There are 28 participating Jesuit universities in the organization, and USF is one of them.

In fact, the university has experience with helping students in the nation who have suffered from a natural disaster. After Hurricane Katrina occurred in 2005, USF volunteered to receive 130 students who were negatively impacted by the massive storm from Loyola University of New Orleans which is another Jesuit school that is a member of the Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities. Theoretically, USF could send students to other Jesuit universities in the nation if the school suffered immense damages as a result of a big earthquake.

Nevertheless, Giardini expressed confidence that USF is well-prepared enough to not have to close its doors after any earthquake. The school did well to survive Loma Prieta in 1989 with just minimal damages. USF dodged a bullet back then, and it hopes that it will do the same when the next tremendous earthquake occurs in San Francisco. 

USF Reacts to New CA Regulations on Water Usage

USF Reacts to New CA Regulations on Water Usage

By: Andrew Noerr

            The University of San Francisco has set new goals to significantly reduce water usage on campus in the midst of the current drought that continues to plague California. USF plans on enacting many changes in regards to its water consumption that will apply to many on-campus facilities and sites that require irrigation watering.

            According to a report created by Facilities Management with the purpose of addressing water conservation on campus, USF used 72.12 million gallons of water on the Hilltop campus, and 12 million gallons of that were applied to irrigation. Also, the university used 33 million gallons of water combined in McLaren Hall, Phelan Hall, Malloy Hall, and the University Center. Seven million gallons of water were utilized in Koret as well.

            With this, USF will implement new policies concerning water conservation that are in reaction to the new Mandatory Water Conservation Regulations that were announced by the California State Water Resources Board on July 29. The regulations are mainly directed toward urban water use, and they will be enforced for 270 days. In addition to all this, the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission is asking for a 10% voluntary water usage reduction to help address the current drought.

            According to the aforementioned report, in order to comply with the new regulations, USF is expected to not apply any potable, meaning drinkable, water to any sidewalks or driveways. Also, the university cannot let any water leak into non-irrigated areas. All wash hoses are required to have shut off nozzles, and fountains that don’t use potable water must contain the proper technology that allows for recirculation of the water.

USF also intends to make numerous changes to its on-campus facilities in order to satisfy the request made by the SFPUC. The university has agreed to impose new practices that it thinks will lead to the school being able to fulfill the goal of reducing overall water usage by 10%.

            First, the report from Facilities Management states that USF has reduced the amount of time that is dedicated to watering irrigation by ten percent. It specifically notes that reducing irrigation watering times will lead to a 3.3 million gallon reduction of water over time. Also, the university has already installed low-flow restroom fixtures such as low-flow toilets, faucets, and showers to many bathrooms on-campus, especially in the student housing units.

According to information listed on the website of the National Resources Defense Council, an organization that is lauded for its environmental activism in the United States, low-flow toilets use only 1.6 gallons of water per flush or less, and low-flow faucets and showers use 2.5 gallons per minute or less. Even with the low flow fixtures on campus, water conservation notices have been posted in all of the restrooms in the student dorms.

            However, it remains to be seen if students will support the efforts being made by USF to ration water. Joseph Murphy, Environmental Safety Manager at USF, expressed skepticism that students will be able to change their daily habits in the wake of the current drought.

            “Students are the 800-pound gorilla in the equation,” Murphy stated. “Landscaping is not as difficult to change. It’s the human behavior changes that will make it hard to comply. Changing human behavior is the greatest challenge.”

             Still, according to the Facilities Management report, USF is currently working with on-campus housing and Koret to find ways to further decrease water usage. USF hopes to install water metering devices for all of the showers in Koret and other on-campus facilities. These metering devices would show how much hot water is being used per shower. Also, the report indicates that Facilities Management is investigating the possibility of installing alternative filtration equipment in the Koret pool.

            If all goes well in enacting the current goals set forth by the Facilities Management in rationing water, the next step would be to pursue using recycled water as a source of non-potable water that can be used at USF. However, USF has experienced difficulties in its pursuit of shifting from potable water to recycled water for on-campus usage.

            “The City of San Francisco's regulations and permit process for allowing the use of recycled water are extremely complicated and cumbersome,” Michael London, Assistant Vice President of Facilities Management, admitted in an e-mail. “It will take a considerable amount of time to figure our pathway through them.”

            As listed on the SFPUC website, San Francisco’s Recycled Water Ordinance that was enacted in 1991 requires property owners in certain designated areas of the city to use recycled water if the property contains 40,000 square feet or more of new construction or alterations to the property, or if the property has 10,000 square feet or more of landscaping. The University of San Francisco is not located in any of the designated areas that have to use recycled water as listed by the SFPUC, but Facilities Management has still stated a desire to utilize recycled water in the future.

            However, if further restrictions are imposed in San Francisco, the report shows that USF will raise its efforts to conserve water by recommending shower flow restrictions on campus. In the meantime, the school is hoping that the combination of changes to its landscaping practices and the efforts to conserve water by the students living in the dorms will allow it to comply with the new Mandatory Water Conservation Regulations in California.